Eduard Dreher

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Eduard Dreher (born April 29, 1907 in Rockau , today a district of Dresden ; † September 13, 1996 in Bonn ) was a German lawyer and senior ministerial official in the early Federal Republic of Germany . At the time of National Socialism , Dreher was the first public prosecutor at the Innsbruck Special Court and rose to become one of the most influential West German criminal lawyers in the 1960s. Dreher became known through his commentary on the criminal code .

Life

Dreher was the son of the Dresden Art Academy professor Richard Dreher . He attended the Kreuzschule and studied law and political science in Vienna , Kiel , Berlin and Leipzig from 1926 to 1929 . After three years of preparatory service in Dresden, he completed his legal training in 1933; a year earlier he received his doctorate from Hermann Jahrreiß in Leipzig . On May 1, 1937, he joined the NSDAP .

From 1938 Dreher was a public prosecutor at the Leipzig Regional Court , from September 1938 at the Dresden Regional Court . On January 1, 1940, he came to Innsbruck after an application. In 1943 he was promoted to the first public prosecutor of the special court in Innsbruck, where political opponents were legally "eliminated". He was also deputy attorney general.

After the end of the Second World War , after two years as a lawyer in Stuttgart, in 1951 on the recommendation of Adolf Arndt (SPD), he joined the Federal Ministry of Justice, Division II for Criminal Law and Procedure. He became general advisor in the Federal Ministry of Justice for the “ major criminal law reform ” and was the editor of the well-known commentary by Schwarz-Dreher, later Dreher, then Dreher-Tröndle, then Tröndle-Fischer (now Fischer ).

Justice service in Saxony

As a judicial assessor in Dresden, he issued a judgment note for the ban on the Bible Students' Association . In the obligatory statement of the Gauleitung Sachsen dated December 17, 1937 on the appointment of Dreher as public prosecutor it says: “The court assessor Dreher is active in the NSV as a clerk for youth welfare and statistics. Against his nat.-soc. There are no concerns about reliability. ”In 1959 he expressed his inner distance from the regime because he refused to function as Gauleiter. "Whatever that means exactly".

Innsbruck special court

Dreher's workplace: the Innsbruck Public Prosecutor's Office in the old state court building

In Austria, after 1938, the Austrian Code of Criminal Procedure continued to apply to ordinary courts , whereas the German Code of Procedure was applied to the special courts . If German and Austrian law competed in “political” criminal offenses , German law applied and the procedure before the special court took precedence. An Austrian peculiarity was that special courts were formed at one or more regional courts. In the Innsbruck court district, special courts were established in Innsbruck, Feldkirch and Salzburg. Dreher was "one of those old Reich German public prosecutors who obviously had to teach the Austrians the practice of justice in the Third Reich."

According to his statement, Dreher worked in Innsbruck in political affairs until the autumn of 1940, then in war economic matters until 1945 . Before the Feldkirch Special Court, he represented the indictment in over 40% of the trials. His theories in essays about the Malicious Act and the Broadcasting Ordinance played a part in the Feldkirch special court practice with over 200 people convicted of it. At the Innsbruck Special Court he was by far the most frequent representative in treacherous matters from 1939 to 1944. He often had to accuse repeat offenders. His claim practice was in the lower midfield. In response to the judicial crisis caused by Hitler's speech in the Reichstag on April 26, 1942, Dreher increased his practice of criminal claims on average for a short time. At that time, the " old fighter " was Rudolf Löderer (1891–), an agitator and fanatical National Socialist, attorney general in Innsbruck.

The official assessment of June 17, 1943 states: “What I particularly appreciate about him, in addition to his solid ability, is his stability and inner security. He is not a compromise person, but a real expert and a personality suitable for leadership. I also consider him completely faithful and reliable in the political field. ”Dreher remained in Innsbruck until 1945. The General Public Prosecutor's Office in Innsbruck declared on July 3, 1945: “Your adoption is only due to the fact that the requirement for further employment in a public office as a German citizen is not met. The examination of their official activities at the public prosecutor's office and the public prosecutor's office did not give rise to any objection. ”Since June 1, 1945, Alarich Obrist was the acting attorney general. Before 1938, Obrist had been close to the German national movement. As head of the Feldkirch public prosecutor's office, he was one of the few senior lawyers left in office by the NSDAP, and came to Innsbruck at the same time as Dreher as deputy attorney general. According to the resistance fighter Ernst Grünewald , Obrist was not considered incriminated, even if the French locked him up in the Reichenau detention camp. Dreher's colleague from the Altreich, the Feldkirch Chief Public Prosecutor Herbert Möller (1902–1981), Supreme Court judge 1954–1967, was almost lynched after the liberation in 1945 because he was hated by the population.

According to Obrist, the files of the Innsbruck Public Prosecutor's Office have largely been destroyed, the existing holdings have not been mapped . More than 80% of the case files for the Innsbruck Special Court are available.

Death penalty

Dreher, one of the "brown book lawyers"

Outside of the legal audience, he became known in particular through the allegations published in the GDR Brown Book . As early as May 1957, the (East German) Committee for German Unity charged him with his work as the first public prosecutor at the Innsbruck Special Court. He was charged with three charges from 1942–1944. The allegations were examined by the Federal Ministry of Justice from 1959 onwards using the “old files” requested from Vienna .

Karoline Hauser

In the trial of the Special Court in Innsbruck on April 15, 1942, public prosecutor Dreher applied for the death penalty against the Austrian peddler Karoline Hauser as a pest and dangerous habitual criminal . According to the Brown Book, Hauser had bought clothing card points from a scrap dealer, which he was supposed to give for crushing. According to Dreher's personnel file, she committed an extensive theft of clothing cards with the intention of making a profit. The special court did not follow Dreher's application. Hauser was sentenced to 15 years in prison . That wasn't enough for Dreher; he suggested a nullity complaint. Before or after Dreher's suggestion, Adolf Hitler castigated the judiciary's overly mild judgments in his Reichstag speech on April 26, 1942. The (Austrian) VI. The criminal senate of the Reichsgericht overturned the judgment on June 19 and referred back again. On August 14, 1942, Dreher applied for the death penalty again. Under the impression of the judicial crisis, Dreher increased its criminal claim practice on average for a short time.

An almost exhausted clothing card in 1942

It is unclear whether Dreher is analogous to § 1 I 2 KWVO or § 1 II, I 2 KWVO as amended. of March 25, 1942 applied or applied for the death penalty because of § 2 or 4 and §§ 20a StGB 1941, 176 I a StG 1852 . According to an official declaration in 1959, he was not involved in death sentences with a war economy background. The special court again did not follow his request and stayed with the same sentence. Dreher had Hauser taken to a labor education camp , which in terms of the matter corresponded to a concentration camp ( file number : KLs. 37/42). During the same period, on September 15, 1942, he got a new superior, Anton Köllinger (born 1883), whose deputy he was for a year. As a result of the liberation amnesty of March 6, 1946, the sentence was overturned by the Innsbruck Regional Court and Hauser was sentenced to 3¼ years in heavy prison.

Josef Knoflach
Blood judge small.jpg

Another victim was the gardener Josef Knoflach from Patsch . At the request of Dreher, the Innsbruck Special Court sentenced him to death on July 19, 1943 for having used a bicycle without authorization and stealing some food. The criminal laws used were Section 1 of the Violent Criminal Act of September 4, 1942 and [...] the Ordinance on Violent Criminals of December 5, 1939 . § 1 of the law amending the Reich Criminal Code of September 4, 1941, RGBl. I, p. 549 was not applicable in Austria. Only the Violent Criminal Ordinance, RGBl. I, p. 2378, provided for the death penalty. In § 20a StGB in the "East Mark" version, the death penalty is missing in contrast to the Old Reich version. The defendant worked in a nursery from 5 a.m. to 8 or 10 p.m. and lived with the employer. According to the nursery owner, as a result of the war, the same meal plan for prisoners of war and Eastern workers was also available for the other workers. When Knoflach got nowhere to eat late at night after work, he took possession of someone else's bike with the aim of breaking into two farms. He stole half a loaf of bread, half a kilo of sugar, some cheese and about a kilo of bacon. After he was caught, he was prevented from escaping through the window by being held by his legs. After the verdict was made, he grabbed a log, tucked it under his left arm, and made some movements with it. This log was stolen from him pretty easily. The defendant then waited in the living room until the gendarmerie appeared. Dreher charged with habitual crimes, violent crimes and blackout crimes. Although the mitigating reason for stealing low-value food to satisfy his hunger was recognized, Knoflach was condemned. A defense attorney from Innsbruck operated his pardon at the Reich Ministry of Justice together with the special court and the chief public prosecutor. He was also supported by the Innsbruck Gauleitung: "The execution of the death sentence would undoubtedly be perceived by the population as far too extensive." The clerk of the Reich Ministry of Justice said the application for the death sentence was "incomprehensible" and found that "the special court would have it." must not simply focus on the convict turning a log against his persecutors, but also have to consider how he handled it. The way in which the rather helpless man waved the unwieldy log was relatively harmless and, in any case, according to a natural, healthy feeling, not immediately worthy of death. ”The death sentence was changed to 8 years imprisonment (Az. KLs 104/43).

Anton Rathgeber
Death penalty for looters, after the liberation in 1945 the party office was made unrecognizable.

After an air raid on Innsbruck, the 62-year-old coffee distiller Anton Rathgeber was sentenced to death on April 27, 1944 because, according to the court, he had plundered four to five weeks after the bombing of Innsbruck. Rathgeber defended himself by claiming that the items worth around 200 Reichsmarks (soiled clothing, empty wicker suitcase, piece of canvas, car tarpaulin, canvas sack) were abandoned and owners could no longer be identified. His full confession did not prevent the “legally only prescribed death penalty” according to Dreher, as he had “15 previous convictions, including 6 for theft”. The thefts from his employer took place 6 years ago and involved a total of around three and a half kilos of fig coffee for personal use. The defense lawyer applied for clemency for Rathgeber, who had been wounded as a soldier at the front and had received two awards. The employer and the court agreed. The court found that because of the length of time there could no longer be any talk of looting in connection with enemy attacks, and considered a prison sentence of twelve years to be appropriate, since without the full and remorseful confession a full guilty verdict would not have been possible . Dreher, on behalf of the Attorney General, rejected the request for clemency on May 3, 1944: “Rathgeber has looted valuable things in four cases and has numerous previous convictions. Even if these are essentially far behind, the convicted person has shown through the new acts and the thefts that have been found to the detriment of his employer that he is still inclined to break the law. Mitigating circumstances, on the other hand, do not seem so important to be able to disregard the basic punishment for looters. "

Dreher defended himself internally in 1959 by stating that the Attorney General Anton Köllinger had instructed him. He did not vote himself. According to his memory, it was decisive: in front of the rubble plots there were boards threatening looters with the death penalty. Rathgeber is said to have been the first perpetrator to be caught and as a deterrent he had to be sentenced to death. According to other sources, seven " foreign workers " were sentenced to death as looters on the next day after the first air raid on December 15, 1943 , and a press release was issued. In the internal review in 1959, Ministerialdirigent Josef Schafheutle , who was responsible for political criminal law in both the Reich and the Federal Ministry of Justice, wrote: “Dr. According to this, Dreher, when bringing the indictment and representing the indictment in the main hearing of the special court, complied with the legal status created by Section 1 of the People's Pest Ordinance and the jurisprudence of the courts, especially the Reichsgericht, during the war. A viable way out to evade the application for the death penalty against Rathgeber did not exist for him as a representative of the public prosecutor. "

More cases

When the Federal Ministry of Justice came to terms with the past, another 17 cases became known in 2016 in which Dreher, as a representative of the public prosecutor's office, demanded death sentences. The Leimberger case of November 24, 1942 was particularly irritating. Within ten hours after Leimberger had fatally stabbed a police officer in custody, he was sentenced to death at Dreher's request and beheaded on November 27, 1942. “It must even be assumed here that it was a“ non-judgment ”because it came about in disregard of all procedural certainties. Under these conditions, Dreher had possibly made himself a criminal offense as a participant or even an accomplice in a homicide of the court, because he personally carried out the execution with willfulness and relentless consistency. "

Federal Ministry of Justice

On July 11, 1947, Eduard Dreher was denazified as a follower in Garmisch-Partenkirchen . He has repeatedly invoked this "largely exonerating tribunal procedure ". Then he came to Stuttgart and worked for a lawyer Wilhelm Geiger. His license to practice law in Stuttgart was repeatedly refused by the Chamber President on the grounds that Dreher was involved in the Nazi system and was unqualified as a former public prosecutor. Dreher wrote repeatedly and increasingly annoyed to the district court president , and so Dreher was admitted to the Stuttgart district court after May 25, 1949 , in protest of the chairman of the North Württemberg Bar Association.

The Rosenburg , seat of the Federal Ministry of Justice until 1973

He was recommended to the Federal Ministry of Justice by Adolf Arndt (SPD) at the end of 1950 . Although Dreher was often attacked, he made a career in the Federal Ministry of Justice from 1951 to 1969. Internal reviews of his special court activities did not prevent his ascent, with the exception of the Rathgeber case, which became public in 1959. At the beginning of 1959, Dreher was in discussion for the post of federal judge , since there was an urgent need for qualified criminal lawyers. At that time, Senate President Ernst Kanter had already become untenable. Before Dreher became criminal law advisor and coordinator of the Grand Criminal Law Commission, Kanter performed this function.

Dreher was initially head of the department for factual criminal law between 1951 and 1966. From 1954 he was responsible for the criminal law reform. In addition to this general section, he was head of the section for the Criminal Code, General Part, from 1954 to 1961, and from 1961 to 1969 (until 1966 additionally) head of subdivision II A.

Statute of limitations scandal

Its role in the statute of limitations scandal was crucial . When the Introductory Act to the Law on Administrative Offenses (EGOWiG) was drawn up in the second half of the 1960s, the latter was given a claused provision which, given the legal situation at the time, meant that the majority of the perpetrators who were involved in murders under National Socialism were in the Enjoyment of the statute of limitations came and thus remained unpunished. Research today assumes that Eduard Dreher was the person responsible for this in the Ministry of Justice.

At first, however, everyone involved wanted to believe that there was a breakdown. The Bundestag agreed on this in 1969. In 1981, the then State Secretary Günther Erkel (SPD) wrote to Dreher how much he regretted that this subject had become “thrown at”. Dreher replied: "I am satisfied that the house is by my side in this unpleasant matter." For a long time, it was not possible to provide direct evidence of Dreher's authorship due to the inaccessibility of the files. Hubert Rottleuthner : "In the absence of self- statements, contemporary historical research is nothing but assumptions, or, to put it more eloquently : a rational reconstruction." The draft laws of the OWiG and the StGB were coordinated in July 1964. The head of the commission responsible for the OWiG, Lackner , therefore consulted the lathe operator responsible for the draft criminal code for the deliberations. The files of the decisive department head meeting in the Federal Ministry of Justice in 1964 have not yet been found, in which the lead speaker and author of the veiled "amnesty" should be listed: "The files have probably been cleaned."

In his best biography, Ulrich Herbert put forward the thesis that the amnesty was initiated by Achenbach and Best .

In 2012, the then Justice Minister Sabine Leutheusser-Schnarrenberger commissioned a project within the framework of which a commission of historians is concerned with the early phase of the BMJ. The commission headed by Manfred Görtemaker (historian) and Christoph Safferling (legal scholar) worked out its results by autumn 2016. Safferling stated in an interview in 2013: “Dreher is proving to be particularly tough: for example, he is applying for the death penalty for stealing panels. If this is not imposed, he is ready to demand it in the next instance. From this you can see that someone who was behind the system was at work here. " In the inventory of the Historians' Commission 2013, Rückert found that the allegations were only" very limited "and said that, measured against the Nuremberg standard of the legal process ," none. " critically burdened people in the ministry ".

In the final report of the Commission of Historians 2016, there were indications of a deliberate manipulation of Drehers regarding the question of the subsequent statute of limitations. Görtemaker and Safferling show that Dreher was the only one "who had a motive, the means and the opportunity" to manipulate the legislation . They name a marginal note on a note as a tool.

Court martial for the Federal Republic

It is unclear whether he advocated a martial law in the Federal Republic that was criticized by some .

Works

Eduard Dreher was a commentator on the penal code in the series of Beck's short comments from 1961 to 1977 (23rd to 37th edition). The commentary, founded by Otto Schwarz and later published as Schwarz-Dreher , is considered a standard work, was continued by Herbert Tröndle and is now called Fischer . A commemorative publication was published for his 70th birthday; one of the two editors was Hans-Heinrich Jescheck .

See also

literature

  • Ernst Klee : The dictionary of persons on the Third Reich . 2nd updated edition. Fischer, Frankfurt am Main 2007, ISBN 978-3-596-16048-8 .
  • Hans-Heinrich Jescheck , Hans Lüttger (Hrsg.): Festschrift for Eduard Dreher on his 70th birthday . 1st edition. De Gruyter, Berlin 1977, ISBN 3-11-005988-6 .
  • Monika Frommel : Tactical Jurisprudence - The hidden amnesty of Nazi desk criminals in 1969 and the aftermath of the case law of that time until today. In: Matthias Mahlmann (Ed.): Festschrift for Hubert Rottleuthner for his 65th birthday. Society and Justice, Nomos 2011, pp. 458ff. (slightly updated PDF version; 204 kB)
  • Manfred Görtemaker , Christoph Safferling : The Rosenburg files. The Federal Ministry of Justice and the Nazi era . CH Beck, Munich 2016, ISBN 978-3-406-69768-5 .
  • Hubert Rottleuthner : Did Dreher turn? About incomprehensibility, incomprehension and incomprehension in legislation and research . In: Legal History Journal . No. 20, 2001, pp. 665-679; Revised version in Kent D. Lerch (Ed.): The language of law. Volume 1: Understand Right. Berlin 2004, pp. 307-320. (PDF)
  • Stephan Alexander Glienke: The de facto amnesty of desk criminals . In: Joachim Perels , Wolfram Wette (Ed.): With a clear conscience. Military power judges in the Federal Republic and their victims. Berlin 2011, pp. 262-277, ISBN 978-3-351-02740-7
  • Michael Greve: Amnesty of Nazi aides - a glitch? The amendment to Section 50 (2) of the Criminal Code and its effects on Nazi criminal prosecution . In: Kritische Justiz (2000), pp. 412–424.

Films, film contributions

  • Gerolf Karwath: Hitler's elites after 1945. Part 4: Jurists - acquittal on their own behalf . Director: Holger Hillesheim. Südwestrundfunk (SWR, 2002).
  • Christoph Weber: File D (1/3) - The failure of the post-war justice system. Documentation, 2014, 45 min. With Norbert Frei ( commentary on Phoenix.de from Nov. 2016)
  • Marco Kreuzpaintner : The Collini case (film) . Judicial Drama, 2019

Web links

Individual evidence

  1. ^ A b Ernst Klee: Das Personenlexikon zum Third Reich , Frankfurt am Main 2007, p. 118.
  2. ↑ Hans-Heinrich Jescheck, Hans Lüttger (Ed.): Festschrift for Eduard Dreher on his 70th birthday. Berlin 1977, p. 1 f.
  3. ↑ Helmut Kramer : Eduard Dreher: From the special court department to the leading criminal lawyer in the Federal Republic. In: Ministry of Justice NRW (ed.): Between right and wrong. CVs of German lawyers. 2004, pp. 101ff.
  4. ↑ a b c d e f g h i Christoph Safferling : The work of the independent scientific commission. In: Federal Ministry of Justice (Ed.): Die Rosenburg - The responsibility of lawyers in the processing process. Contributions to the 2nd symposium on February 5, 2013 in the jury court room in Nuremberg, Berlin 2013, p. 15ff.
  5. ^ In: Roland Staudinger: Politische Justiz - the Tyrolean special jurisdiction in the Third Reich using the example of the law against insidious attacks on the party and the state. Schwaz 1994, p. 137, Dreher is named in Figure 25 as the public prosecutor for 1939, also p. 237ff.
  6. ↑ a b c d e f g h i Joachim Rückert : Some remarks about followers, followers and other runners in the Federal Ministry of Justice after 1949 . In: Manfred Görtemaker , Christoph Safferling (ed.): The Rosenburg: The Federal Ministry of Justice and the Nazi past - an inventory. P. 79 ff.
  7. ↑ a b FAZ of February 6, 2013, p. 4: Self-amnesty in the Ministry .
  8. ↑ Juristische Wochenschrift Volume 64 (1935), p. 1949, judgment note
  9. ↑ Addition Safferlings to the 2nd symposium on the Nazi past of the BMJ, which deviates from the printed speech: Youtube channel of the Federal Ministry of Justice: 2nd symposium on the Nazi past of the BMJ (part 1/3) ( memento from October 16 2013 in the Internet Archive ), from min. 51.
  10. ^ On special courts in Austria: Winfried R. Garscha, Franz Scharf: Justiz in Oberdonau. Linz 2007, Upper Austrian Provincial Archives , ISBN 978-3-900313-85-2 , p. 127ff .; Roland Staudinger: Political Justice - the Tyrolean special jurisdiction in the Third Reich using the example of the law against insidious attacks on party and state. Schwaz 1994, p. 46ff.
  11. ↑ a b c Martin Achrainer: The "Standgerichte der Heimatfront": The special courts in Tyrol and Vorarlberg. In: Rolf Steininger / Sabine Pitscheider (eds.): Tyrol and Vorarlberg in the Nazi era. Innsbruck 2002, ISBN 3-7065-1634-9 , pp. 122, 125.
  12. ^ The significance of the case law on the Defense Ordinance for the law of December 20, 1934. JW 1935, 89; Competitive conditions from the treachery law of December 20, 1934. DJ 1940, 1189.
  13. ↑ Various legal questions of the Broadcasting Ordinance. Rundfunkarchiv 1940, p. 21; Various legal questions of the broadcasting regulation. DJ 1940, p. 1419 f.
  14. ↑ Roland Staudinger: Political Justice - the Tyrolean special jurisdiction in the Third Reich using the example of the law against insidious attacks on the party and state - Schwaz 1994, p. 138.
  15. ↑ On typewriters without ß, see Garscha / Scharf p. 30.
  16. ↑ Michael Greve: Amnesty of Nazi aides - a glitch? KJ 2000, p. 416 speaks of a clean bill of health from the Attorney General Grünberg. It is unclear whether this letter is meant or a document from the 1947 Spruchkammer proceedings.
  17. ^ Chief Public Prosecutor Mario Laich: Development of the administration of criminal justice in Tyrol and Vorarlberg. In: Viktor Liebscher, Otto F. Müller (eds.): Festschrift 100 Years of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1873–1973. P. 93f .; ders. Discussion on: Herbert Steiner: The death penalty - a decisive component of the structure of the National Socialist power system in Austria 1938 to 1945. in Erika Weinzierl u. a. (Ed.): Justice and Contemporary History Symposium 1980: The Austrian Justice - The Justice in Austria 1933–1955. Vienna 1980, p. 93 ff.
  18. ↑ Christoph Volaucnik: Feldkirch 1945 to 1955. In: Ulrich Nachbaur , Alois Niederstätter : Aufbruch in ein neue Zeit. Vorarlberger Almanach for the anniversary year 2005. Bregenz 2006 ( PDF ( Memento of the original from September 25, 2013 in the Internet Archive ) Info: The archive link has been inserted automatically and has not yet been checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this note. ) . @1@ 2Template: Webachiv / IABot / www.vorarlberg.at
  19. ↑ The files that have not yet been “thinned out” are in the Tyrolean Provincial Archives : Public Prosecutor Higher Regional Court Innsbruck: General and collective files 1939–1945 .
  20. ^ Tiroler Landesarchiv: Special Court Innsbruck: Criminal Matters (KLs)
  21. ^ "Yesterday Hitler's blood judge - today Bonn's judicial elite" (23 May 1957).
  22. ↑ § 20a RStGB in the "Ostmärkischen" version acc. Section 4 of the Act to Implement the Amendment to the Reich Criminal Code of September 24, 1941, RGBl. I, 581 on ALEX .
  23. ^ A b c Eduard Rabofsky / Gerhard Oberkofler: Hidden Roots of the Nazi Justice. Criminal armament for two world wars, Vienna 1985, pp. 75ff.
  24. ^ The Brown Book on p. 147: applied for the annulment complaint . On page 81, Rückert does not comment on whether Dreher initiated the nullity complaint. See also Lothar Gruchmann : Justice in the Third Reich 1933-1940, p. 1086: Only about 15% of the suggestions aimed at correcting the contested decisions to the detriment of the convicted person.
  25. ↑ Roland Staudinger: Political Justice - the Tyrolean special jurisdiction in the Third Reich using the example of the law against insidious attacks on party and state. Schwaz 1994, p. 138.
  26. ↑ So for the theft of purchase cards: Mittelbach , § 1 of the War Economy Ordinance. Bad Oeynhausen 1941, p. 24f.
  27. ↑ Ordinance supplementing the War Economy Ordinance, RGBl. I, p. 147 on ALEX.
  28. ↑ Circular order of the Reich Minister of Justice of September 4, 1941 for the application of § 4 VVO for the use of forged Reich clothing cards dropped by Allied aircraft, Garscha / Scharf: Justice in Oberdonau. Linz 2007, p. 364f.
  29. ↑ On the use of the death penalty for habitual and occasional thieves according to Section 20a of the StGB "Ostmark version" and VVO, see Garscha / Scharf: Justice in Upper Danube. Linz 2007, p. 253ff.
  30. ↑ Brown Book p. 147.
  31. ↑ Federal Law Gazette No. 79/1946 : Federal Act of March 6, 1946 on the Discontinuation of Criminal Proceedings, Forbearance of Punishments and the Deletion of Convictions on the Occasion of the Liberation of Austria (Liberation Amnesty)
  32. ^ With the Court Organization Act of July 3, 1945 ( StGBl. No. 47/1945 ), the regional courts that had existed since 1939 were renamed again; insofar imprecise the "Innsbruck Regional Court" at Rückert, p. 81.
  33. ↑ Unclear whether according to the Requirements Coverage Penal Act (BDStG) or the StG.
  34. ↑ Sebastian Cobler : Punished as a rubber pig. In: Der Spiegel. November 30, 1981, pp. 206ff.
  35. ↑ Rosenburg, p. 80 speaks of a bombing night. In fact, there was only one night attack on Innsbruck: on April 10, 1945, cf. Leo Unterrichter: The air raids on North Tyrol in the war 1939–1945. Publications of the Museum Ferdinandeum, Volume 26/29 (1946/49), Innsbruck 1949, p. 577 (pdf).
  36. ^ Horst Schreiber: Innsbruck in the bombing war. In: Konrad Arnold (Ed.): Air raid tunnels from the Second World War. The example of Innsbruck. From history to solving legal and technical problems in the present (= publications by the Innsbruck City Archives, New Series, Volume 27). Innsbruck 2002, p. 15 ff. ( Online ).
  37. ^ Manfred Görtemaker , Christoph Safferling : The Rosenburg files. The Federal Ministry of Justice and the Nazi era. Munich 2016, p. 733.
  38. ^ Gerhard Mauz : The state of the judiciary corresponds to that of the people . Der Spiegel from November 24, 1965.
  39. ^ Kerstin Freudiger: The legal processing of Nazi crimes, Tübingen 2002, 150 .
  40. ↑ Michael Greve: Amnesty of Nazi assistants. The amendment to Section 50 (2) of the Criminal Code and its effects on Nazi criminal prosecution. In: Insight 04 - Bulletin of the Fritz Bauer Institute ( PDF ).
  41. ↑ Ulrich Herbert: Best. Biographical studies on radicalism, worldview and reason. 1903-1989. 3rd edition, Dietz, Bonn 1996, ISBN 3-8012-5019-9 , p. 510.
  42. ↑ Funding and scope of the research project on the Nazi past in the Federal Ministry of Justice, Bundestag printed paper 17/10495 of August 16, 2012: The Federal Government's response to the small question from the BÜNDNIS 90 / DIE GRÜNEN u. a. - 17/10364 - ( PDF ).
  43. ↑ Margarita Erbach: Christoph Safferling: “Young people missing” , interview in the Generalanzeiger on May 30, 2013, accessed on July 23, 2013.
  44. ↑ Joachim Rückert: Some remarks about followers, followers and other runners in the Federal Ministry of Justice after 1949. In: Manfred Görtemaker , Christoph Safferling (Ed.): Die Rosenburg: The Federal Ministry of Justice and the Nazi past - an inventory , p. 87 .
  45. ^ Manfred Görtemaker, Christoph Safferling: The Rosenburg files. The Federal Ministry of Justice and the Nazi era. Munich 2016, p. 420.
  46. ↑ The brown shadows of the Rosenburg. In: Welt Online . Retrieved October 10, 2016 .
  47. ↑ Ralf Beste, Georg Bönisch, Thomas Darnstädt , Jan Friedmann, Michael Fröhlingsdorf, Klaus Wiegrefe : Wave of Truths , Der Spiegel from January 2, 2012; BT-Drs. 17/8538. Max Stadler's answer to Burkhard Lischka's written question from January 3, p. 16 ( PDF ).
  48. ↑ Norbert Frei: Careers in the Twilight. Frankfurt 2001, ISBN 3-593-36790-4 , p. 204.
personal data
SURNAME Dreher, Eduard
BRIEF DESCRIPTION German lawyer and senior ministerial official
DATE OF BIRTH April 29, 1907
PLACE OF BIRTH Rockau
DATE OF DEATH September 13, 1996
Place of death Bonn