나치즘과 형법이데올로기
National Socialism and Ideology of Criminal Legal Science
0
조회
0
다운로드
4
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
This article aims at catching the main characteristics of criminal legal science in the era of National Socialist regime. The Nazi legal scholars,leaning on the neohegelianism or phenomenology, engaged in the ideological struggle against the left liberals and marxists during the Weimar period. After the takeover of power, they excluded the principles of the liberal-social legality and concretized the national socialism in various aspects. Several methodological or ideological traits of nazi criminal legal science are argued in this essay. First, the nazi lawyers advocated the notion of material law (Recht) against the formalist-positivist legal conception(Gesetz). Their conception of the material law had no theoretical relationship with rationalist tradition of natural law. On the contrary, it is regarded as the neohegelian version of the living law in the context of the Free Law Movement or the concrete folk law under the frame of the Historical School of Law. Second, they criticised the objective theory of crime based upon the harm to legal interests and instead advocated the national and communal conceptions of crime which were named as duty-based theory or treason theory. They overvalued the communitarian obligations and attitudes so that they could not find the reasonable borderline between crime and ethical evil from the perspective of National Socialism. Third, they sentenced that the principle of ‘nullum crimen sine lege’ has only limited value under the circumstances of the liberal individualist society. They claimed that the judge should try to apply criminal law by analogy in the spirit of national socialism or Hitler. Sound national feeling (gesundes Volksemfinden) which is introduced into the Criminal Code of 1935 gave the judge the power to apply the criminal law by analogy. Fourth, they annihilated the traditional maxim of judge’s duty of jus dicare in the passive sense. They instead introduce the leader’s will (Führerwille) as the highest canon for legal interpretation. Minister of Justice Gürtner ordered that the judge should ask to himself in every case what decision the Führer would make in his place. Accordingly, the Nazi jurists were standardized as an instrument for carrying the leader’s will. Fifth, they developed the theory of the criminal law focusing on the human mind or attitude (Willensstrafrecht or Gesinnungsstrafrecht). Such theories made it possibile to punish the pre-stage of criminal act independently of corpus delicti. Nazi legal scientists constructed the theory of political criminal law which was in the service of oppressing the political enemies according to the distinction of friend and enemy. The nazi criminal theory was comparable to the medieval inquisition against the heretics or witches. Nazi-styled political trials repeat itself in the past cold war or in the anti-terror war. Sixth, the National Socialists constructed the social hierarchy according to racist or social Darwinist distinction. They concretized the national socialist criminal policy against the social enemies. The social outcasts which were named as social wastes detrimental to the purity of Aryan blood (Gemeinschaftsfremde or Artfremde) were massively killed. The Nazi jurists justified the Nazi extermination politics by way of the Blood Protection Act(1935), State Citizenship Act(1935), and Compulsory 42 일감법학 제 26 호Sterilisation Act(1933). The assertion that National Socialism or the Nazi criminal jurisprudence should be overcome receives widespread support, but it is not easy to define clearly National Socialism to be eradicated. Generally speaking, National Socialism is a conglomeration of different thought elements of thought (Gedankenelemente) rather than the consequent system of thoughts. Therefore, clinging to the essentialist approach to the National Socialism is deemed to be anachronistic. On the contrary, the civic vigilance should be tightened against the situations and contexts which will easily flocculate the elements of conservative thoughts.
Abstract
This article aims at catching the main characteristics of criminal legal science in the era of National Socialist regime. The Nazi legal scholars,leaning on the neohegelianism or phenomenology, engaged in the ideological struggle against the left liberals and marxists during the Weimar period. After the takeover of power, they excluded the principles of the liberal-social legality and concretized the national socialism in various aspects. Several methodological or ideological traits of nazi criminal legal science are argued in this essay. First, the nazi lawyers advocated the notion of material law (Recht) against the formalist-positivist legal conception(Gesetz). Their conception of the material law had no theoretical relationship with rationalist tradition of natural law. On the contrary, it is regarded as the neohegelian version of the living law in the context of the Free Law Movement or the concrete folk law under the frame of the Historical School of Law. Second, they criticised the objective theory of crime based upon the harm to legal interests and instead advocated the national and communal conceptions of crime which were named as duty-based theory or treason theory. They overvalued the communitarian obligations and attitudes so that they could not find the reasonable borderline between crime and ethical evil from the perspective of National Socialism. Third, they sentenced that the principle of ‘nullum crimen sine lege’ has only limited value under the circumstances of the liberal individualist society. They claimed that the judge should try to apply criminal law by analogy in the spirit of national socialism or Hitler. Sound national feeling (gesundes Volksemfinden) which is introduced into the Criminal Code of 1935 gave the judge the power to apply the criminal law by analogy. Fourth, they annihilated the traditional maxim of judge’s duty of jus dicare in the passive sense. They instead introduce the leader’s will (Führerwille) as the highest canon for legal interpretation. Minister of Justice Gürtner ordered that the judge should ask to himself in every case what decision the Führer would make in his place. Accordingly, the Nazi jurists were standardized as an instrument for carrying the leader’s will. Fifth, they developed the theory of the criminal law focusing on the human mind or attitude (Willensstrafrecht or Gesinnungsstrafrecht). Such theories made it possibile to punish the pre-stage of criminal act independently of corpus delicti. Nazi legal scientists constructed the theory of political criminal law which was in the service of oppressing the political enemies according to the distinction of friend and enemy. The nazi criminal theory was comparable to the medieval inquisition against the heretics or witches. Nazi-styled political trials repeat itself in the past cold war or in the anti-terror war. Sixth, the National Socialists constructed the social hierarchy according to racist or social Darwinist distinction. They concretized the national socialist criminal policy against the social enemies. The social outcasts which were named as social wastes detrimental to the purity of Aryan blood (Gemeinschaftsfremde or Artfremde) were massively killed. The Nazi jurists justified the Nazi extermination politics by way of the Blood Protection Act(1935), State Citizenship Act(1935), and Compulsory 42 일감법학 제 26 호Sterilisation Act(1933). The assertion that National Socialism or the Nazi criminal jurisprudence should be overcome receives widespread support, but it is not easy to define clearly National Socialism to be eradicated. Generally speaking, National Socialism is a conglomeration of different thought elements of thought (Gedankenelemente) rather than the consequent system of thoughts. Therefore, clinging to the essentialist approach to the National Socialism is deemed to be anachronistic. On the contrary, the civic vigilance should be tightened against the situations and contexts which will easily flocculate the elements of conservative thoughts.
참고문헌 (54)
- 라렌츠, "정당한 법의 원리" (1995), 박영사
- 바우만, "쓰레기가 되는 삶들" (2008), 새물결
- 이재승, "국가범죄" (2010), 앨피
- 한나 아렌트, "예루살렘의 아이히만" (2006), 한길사
- Dahm, Georg, "Nationalsozialistisches und faschistisches Strafrecht" (1935), Dunker und Dünnhaupt
- Hartl, Bendedikt, "Das nationalsozialistische Willensstrafrecht" (2000), Weißensee
- Hirsch, Martin, "Recht, Verwaltung und Justiz im Nationalsozialismus" (1984), Köln
- Julia von dem Knesebeck, "The Rome Struggle for Compensation in Post-War Germany, University of Hertfordshire Press" (2011), Hertfordshire
- Larenz, Karl, "Deutsche Rechtserneuerung und Rechtsphilosophie" (1934), Mohr
- Marxen, Klaus, "Der Kampf gegen das liberale Strafrecht" (1975), Dunker & Humblot
- Müller, Ingo, "Furchtbare Juristen : Die unbewältigte Vergangenheit unserer Justiz" (1989), Knaur
- Regge, Jürgen, "Quellen zur Reform des Straf-und Strafprozessrechts" (1988), Walter de Gruyter
- Rüthers, Bernd, "Zum Wandel der Privatrechtsordnung im Nationalsozialismus 4 Aufl" (1991), C.F.Müller
- Schaffstein, Friedrich, "Das Verbrechen als Pflichtverletzung" (1935)
- Schmidt, Eberhard, "Einführung in die Geschichte der deutschen Strafrechtspflege" (1983), Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht
- Schmitt, Carl, "Legalität und Legitimität 7 Aufl" (2005), Dunker & Humblot
- Schreiber, "Gesetz und Richter" (1984), Metzner
- Welzel, Hans, "Abhandlungen zum Strafrecht und zur Rechtsphilosophie" (1975)
- Werle, Gerhard, "Justiz-Strafrecht Und Polizeiliche Verbrechensbekampfung Im Dritten Reich" (1989), De Gruyter
- Wittreck, Fabian, "Nationalsizialistische Rechtslehre und Naturrecht" (2008), Mohr Siebeck
- 김호기, "Jakobs의 적형법론과 그에 대한 비판 ― 우리나라의 특정 성범죄자에 대한 위치추적 전자장치 부착제도의 도입이 가지는 의미 ―", 서울법학, 16(2), pp.39~60 (2009), 서울시립대학교 법학연구소
- 벨첼, "목적적 행위론 입문", 사법행정, pp.56~59 (1967), 한국사법행정학회
- 이재승, "연합국의 독일점령과 사법정책에 관한 연구", 민주법학, (27), pp.296~323 (2005), 민주주의법학연구회
- 이재승, "전후냉전사법의 재해석", 역사와 책임, 1(4), pp.91~123 (2013), 민족문제연구소
- Dahm, Georg, "Der Methodenstreit in der heutigen Strafrechtswissenschaft", Zeitschrift für die gesamte Strafrechtswissenschaft Bd, 57, pp.225~294 (1937), Walter de Gruyter
- Eckert, Jörn, "Was war die Kieler Schule?, In Recht und Rechtslehre im Nationalsozialismus", pp.37~70 (1992), Nomos
- Frommel, Monika, "Von der Strafrechtsreform zur Rechtserneuerung,In Recht, Rechtsphilosophie und Nationalsozialismus", pp.45~54 (1984), Franz Steiner
- Frommel, Monika, "Welzels finale Handlungslehre. Eine konservative Antwort auf das nationalsozialistische Willensstrafrecht-oder die Legende von der Überwindung des Wertneutralismus im Strafrecht, In Strafjustiz und Polizei im Dritten Reich", pp.86~96 (1984), Frankfurt
- Jakobs, Günter, "Bürgerstrafrecht und Feindstrafrecht", Ritsmeikan Law Review No, 21, pp.93~108 (2004)
- Kaufmann, Arthur, "National Socialism and German Jurisprudence from 1933 to 1945", Cardozo Law Review, 9, pp.1629~1649 (1988)
- Loos, Fritz, "Hans Welzel(1904-1977): Die Suche nach Überpositivität im Recht, In Rechtswissenschaft in Göttingen: Göttinger Juristen aus 250 Jahren", pp.486~509 (1987), Vadenhoeck & Ruprecht
- Marxen, Klaus, "Die Rechtsphilosophische Begründung der Straftatlehre im Nationalsozialismus, In Recht, Rechtsphilosophie und Nationalsozialismus", pp.55~64 (1983)
- Maus, Ingeborg, "Gesetzesbindung der Justiz und die Struktur der nationalsozialistischen Rechtsnormen, In Recht und Justiz im >Dritten Reich", pp.81~104 (1989), Suhrkamp
- Maus, Ingeborg, "Die Trennung von Recht und Moral als Begrenzung des Rechts", Rechtstheorie, 20, pp.191~210 (1989)
- Mezger, Edmund, "die materielle Rechtswidrigkeit im kommenden Strafrecht", Zeitschrift für die gesamte Strafrechtswissenschaft Bd, 55, pp.1~17 (1935)
- "Rechtsgeschichte und Sozialwissenschaft im Strafrecht und Problembewusstsein in der Juristen"[URL]
- Münich, Ingo von, "Tabuierung von Begriffen", NJW, pp.634~635 (1994)
- Naucke, Wolfgang, "Die Mißachtung des strafrechtlichen Rückwirkungsverbots 1933-1945”, Europäisches Rechtsdenken in Geschichte und Gegenwart, FS-Helmut Coing", 225~247 (1982)
- Neumann, Volker, "Vom Entscheidungs-zum Ordnungsdenken, In Recht, Rechtsphilosophie und Nationalsozialismus", pp.152~163 (1984), Franz Steiner
- Paulson, Stanley L, "Lon L. Fuller, Gustav Radbruch, and the ‘Positivist’ These", Law and Philosophy, 13, pp.313~359 (1994)
- Preuss, Lawrence, "Punishment by Analogy in National Socialistic Penal Law", Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 26, pp.847~856 (1936)
- Radbruch, Gustav, "Die geistesgeschichtliche Lage der Strafrechtsreform (1931), In Strafrechtsreform Gustav Radbruch Gesamtausgabe Bd. 9", pp.323~330 (1931)
- Radbruch, Gustav, "Fascistisches Strafrecht, In Strafrecht II, Gustav Radbruch Gesamtausgabe Bd. 8", pp.221~225 (1998), C.F.Müller
- Radbruch, Gustav, "Strafrechtsreform und Nationalsozialismus(1933), In Strafrechtsreform Gustav Radbruch Gesamtausgabe Bd. 9", pp.331~335 (1933), C.F.Müller
- Radbruch, Gustav, "Die Erneuerung des Rechts(1947), In Rechtsphilosophie Ⅲ Gustav Radbruch Gesamtausgabe Bd. 3", pp.107~117 (1990), C.F.Müller
- Rüthers, Bernd, "Die Ideologie des Nationalsozialism in der Entwicklung des deutshcen Rechrs von 1933 bis 1945, In Recht und Rechtslehre im Nationalsozialismus", pp.17~36 (1992), Nomos
- Schmitt, Carl, "Weiterentwicklung des totalen Staats in Deutschland (1933), In Verfassungsrechtliche Aufsätze 3 Aufl", pp.359~366 (1985), Walter de Gruyter
- Der Führer schützt das Recht, "Schmitt, Carl", Deutsche Juristen-Zeitung, 945~950, pp.Heft 15 (1934)
- "The 8 Stages of Genocide"[URL]
- Walther, Manfred, "Hat der juristische Positivismus die deutschen Juristen wehrlos gemacht?, In Recht und Justiz im >Dritten Reich<, Suhrkamp", pp.323~354 (1989), Frankfurt
- Werle, Gerhard, "Das Gesetz ist Wille und Plan des Führers", pp.1267~1269 (1995), NJW
- Wilson, Charles H, "The Separation of powers under democracy and fascism", Political Science Quarterly, 52, pp.481~504 (1937)
- Wolf, Gerhard, "Befreiung des Strafrechts vom nationalsozialistischen Denken?, In Humboldt Forum Recht", pp.52~63 (1996), Humboldt Universität zu Berlin
- Zimmerl, Leopold, "Zur Auslegung des §2, In Gegenwartsfragen der Strafrechtswissenschaft", pp.173~187 (1936)