Rehabilitation of German war criminals in Russia

The decree of December 7, 1948 on the initiation of a criminal case against the corporal G. Y. Beetzinger, who participated in the murder of more than 600 civilians. Bitzinger will be rehabilitated in 1992 by the prosecutor's office out of court

During the Great Patriotic War, much of the territory of the USSR was occupied by the troops of Germany and its allies. War crimes were committed in the occupied territory - massacres of civilians and Soviet prisoners of war . After the war, thousands of foreign citizens (mostly citizens of the Third Reich) accused of war crimes by Soviet bodies. More than 10 public trials of groups of war criminals (for example, the Smolensk process ) were conducted. These trials of foreign war criminals were open and carefully organized. They were conducted in different cities of the USSR, liberated from the enemy. At the end of 1947, the last indicative courts of this kind were held: in Stalino, Sevastopol, Bobruisk, Chernigov, Poltava, Vitebsk, Novgorod, Chisinau and Gomel ^[1] .

The legal basis for the trials of these foreign war criminals was the Decree of the Presidium of the Supreme Soviet of the USSR of April 19, 1943 ^[2] .

In the late 1940s, the Soviet authorities were forced to speed up the process of handling cases of foreign war criminals. This was due to two reasons. First, public processes were very expensive. Secondly, the former anti-Hitler coalition allies pressed on the USSR, insisting on the completion of the repatriation of prisoners of war.

In this regard, it was decided to judge foreign war criminals under an accelerated procedure, that is, with a departure from the existing Soviet criminal procedure. In particular, military tribunals handed down sentences in 20-30 minutes without the involvement of the prosecution, defense counsel and interrogation of witnesses ^[3] .

When convicted, the sentence was often based on the confessions of the accused, and the quality of cases against foreigners was lower than that of Soviet citizens who were involved by the same decree of the Presidium of the Supreme Soviet of the USSR of April 19, 1943. The historian N. V. Surzhikov, based on the results of a study of archival and investigative cases involving prisoners of war and internees, concluded that a case against a foreigner often began with an arrest warrant, and the materials of the preliminary investigation were practically absent in the case file ^[4] .

However, the active defense of the accused could lead to the termination of cases. In particular, the refusal of confessions by a prisoner of war could have led to the termination of the case “for lack of evidence”, since the investigators often had no other evidence. Thus, at the court session of December 14, 1948, Ober-Corporal G. Becker refused confessions and demanded to interrogate witnesses from among co-workers ^[5 , accused of participation in robberies, arrests, hijacking slave labor in Germany and forcibly hiring peaceful Soviet citizens. ^] . The Becker case was sent for further investigation and closed for lack of evidence on March 17, 1949 ^[6] . The investigation again began the trial of Becker’s case, but on October 14, 1949 the case was again (finally) stopped ^[7] .

Becker’s case was not the only case when the refusal in court of previously given confessions led to the termination of criminal prosecution. On December 21, 1949, private G. Aigner refused his testimony and the next day Aigner's case was closed ^[8] . The corporal of the construction battalion, M. Bem, accused of seizing food from the Soviet civilian population, refused his testimony on December 23, 1949 ^[9] . After further investigation on February 27, 1950, all charges against Bema were dropped, since no facts could be established that incriminate his criminal activities ^[10] .

Some accused the Soviet court was forced to reclassify the charge. Thus, the personal pilot of A. Hitler, General G. Bauer, was accused of taking part in the development of military plans, controlling the aircraft during Hitler’s visit to B. Mussolini ^[11] . At trial, Bauer advised the chairman "to arrest the locomotive driver who dragged the car in which Hitler and Mussolini negotiated in the Brenner Pass area" ^[12] . This caused confusion, but after a 15-minute break, the Soviet tribunal condemned Bauer with the wording ^[13] :

The decree of the Presidium of the Supreme Soviet of the USSR of April 19, 1943 was also applied to foreign war criminals who committed crimes against foreigners outside the USSR. Thus, the former police chief of the “K” (transport) department of the security police E. Bayer, who served in Poland in Warsaw , Kattowicz and Czestochowa , was sentenced to 25 years in labor camps under article 1 of the Decree of April 19, 1943 and article 17 The Criminal Code of the RSFSR for serving in the German punitive bodies and participating in the beginning of September 1944 in the suppression of the Warsaw Uprising ^[14] . On the basis of Article 1 of the Decree of April 19, 1943, non-commissioned officer V.Out was convicted of 25 years in correctional camps for participation in the looting of the Czech civilian population ^[15] .

As of February 1950, a total of 13,515 convicted prisoners and remand prisoners of war were left in the USSR ^[16] . The remaining prisoners of war were repatriated to their homeland.

In 1950-1953, the number of foreign war criminals serving in the USSR increased as a result of foreigners convicted by Soviet military tribunals and interned in the Soviet Union from the countries of Eastern Europe ^[17] . On July 1, 1953 in the USSR there were 19118 foreigners convicted of military crimes: 17528 prisoners of war and 1590 internees ^[18] . Almost half of such convicts (6,455 prisoners of war and 715 interned as of July 1, 1953) served their sentences in camp No. 476 of the USSR Ministry of Internal Affairs ( Sverdlovsk Region ) ^[19] .

In the years 1953-1956, the surviving foreign war criminals were released and repatriated. This was due to the attempts of the Soviet authorities to solve the problem of Germany and Austria. As early as April 1953, the Presidium of the Central Committee of the CPSU instructed the interdepartmental commission chaired by the USSR Minister of Justice KP Gorshenin to reconsider the sentences in respect of those foreign citizens, who were no longer necessary to detain in prison ^[20] . A month later, the commission recommended that 12,700 German citizens be released from punishment ^[21] . Liberation begins ^[22]

In May 1955, a treaty was concluded between the USSR and the restored Austria ^[23] . The Presidium of the Supreme Soviet of the USSR then issued a decree on amnesty and repatriation to the homeland of all convicted Austrian citizens ^[24] . After that, convicted foreigners were grouped on the basis of citizenship, transferred to lightened conditions of detention (with the removal of watchtowers and guards with dogs) ^[25] . In May 1955, the Austrians were collected, they underwent a physical examination, they were put on intensive food and released under an amnesty ^[26] . Before being sent home, the liberated Austrians were given new clothes and shoes, paid the money they earned and paid compensation (symbolic) for the valuables taken from them ^[27] . They sent Austrians from Sverdlovsk with an orchestra, awarded those who distinguished themselves at work with gifts and conducted an excursion to the Sverdlovsk Regional Museum of Local Lore ^[28] .

Echelons with the Austrians drove fast. So the first train with the liberated Austrians (250 repatriates) left Sverdlovsk on May 20, 1955 and crossed the USSR border near Chop station on June 2 of the same year ^[29] . Austrian Chancellor Julius Raab , relatives and acquaintances met returnees in Vienna ^[30] .

In Austria, the liberated criminals were met as victims of communism . Austrian officials openly emphasized that the arrivals were convicted unfairly. This was manifested at the meeting of the second echelon with the repatriated Austrians, who arrived in Vienna from the Sverdlovsk region. The second echelon with the liberated Austrians departed for Austria in June 1955 ^[31] . In Austria, representatives of the International Red Cross greeted them with flowers and gifts ^[32] . In Vienna, the train was met by several thousand people, including the mayor of the city ^[33] . The Minister of the Interior de Austria addressed repatriates with a speech ^[34] :

... we had great work to return you to your homeland. You were convicted by a Soviet court illegally, so we do not consider you as criminals and will provide the necessary assistance in arranging your life and welfare

Assistance was provided. Upon arrival, each repatriate was presented with gifts, 3,000 Austrian shillings were given out and taken to their homes by car ^[35] .

For the Austrians released the Germans. In September 1955 (after the visit of the German Chancellor K. Adenauer to the USSR), the Presidium of the Supreme Soviet of the USSR issued a decree on amnesty for German citizens ^[36] . Already on September 29, 1955, the first echelon departed from the Sverdlovsk Region with the liberated Germans ^[37] . Repatriation was then suspended until December 1955 ^[38] .

At the same time, the citizens of Hungary and Romania were repatriated, with a significant part of the repatriated people being amnestied. Non-amnestized were handed over to the authorities of these two countries for further punishment. Thus, 394 Hungarian and 442 Romanian citizens who departed from camp No. 476 in the Sverdlovsk Region were granted amnesty to 239 and 268 people, respectively ^[39] . In February 1956, camp No. 476 was closed due to the completion of repatriation ^[40] . Only Soviet citizens who accepted German citizenship and some Romanian citizens remained unrepatriated ^[41] .

Rehabilitation of foreign war criminals has become part of the great rehabilitation of victims of political repression of the 1990s. The legal basis was the law on the rehabilitation of victims of political repression of October 18, 1991. To implement it, a Commission for the rehabilitation of victims of political repression was created under the President of the Russian Federation, headed by Alexander Yakovlev ^[42] . In the first 10 years of the 1991 law, about 4.5 million people were rehabilitated, of which 92% were posthumously ^[43] .

The 1991 law formally put Russian and foreign citizens on an equal footing ^[44] . However, Boris Yeltsin , as historian Timothy Colton concluded, often used archives for foreign policy in the first year of his reign ^[45] . At the same time, the president did not always check that there were sufficient grounds for political statements. In particular, in June 1992 in Washington, Yeltsin promised the US Congress to disclose information about American prisoners of war of the Korean and Vietnamese wars that could get into the USSR ^[46] . Although the statement made a lot of noise, no American prisoners of war or records of them were ever found ^[47] .

Despite the equality declared by the law, in practice, the revision of foreigners' cases was carried out in an expedited manner, for which Russian President Boris Yeltsin and German Chancellor Helmut Kohl spoke on December 16, 1992 ^[48] . To review the cases of convicted foreign criminals, a special department was created in the Rehabilitation Administration of the Chief Military Prosecutor's Office ^[49] .

Some German politicians insisted on the total rehabilitation of foreign war criminals convicted in the USSR. For example, in 1992, CDU member Alfred Dregger proposed to rehabilitate all Wehrmacht prisoners of war (including those convicted of atrocities in the occupied territory of the USSR) by the President of Russia ^[50] .

In October 1995, the Department of Rehabilitation of Russian and Foreign Citizens was created in the Chief Military Prosecutor’s Office, which was to implement the 1991 law on rehabilitation ^[51] . It interacted with the Commission for Rehabilitation under the President of the Russian Federation ^[52] .

The decision on rehabilitation was made on the basis of petitions. The term for consideration of the application is not more than 3 months ^[53] . At first, following the consideration of a petition for rehabilitation, the military prosecutor drew a conclusion on rehabilitation ^[54] . The conclusion was claimed by the head of the rehabilitation department (or his deputy or the head of the department of the rehabilitation department) ^[55] .

In case of impossibility of rehabilitation for objective reasons, the applicant’s case with the conclusion signed by the Chief Military Prosecutor of Russia was sent to the military court, which rendered a final (positive or negative) decision based on the evidence in the case ^[56] .

The mass character of extrajudicial rehabilitation was given by two orders of the Prosecutor General of the Russian Federation (September 17, 1992 and April 20, 1994). They ordered employees of the Rehabilitation Directorate of the Chief Military Prosecutor’s Office of the Russian Federation to conduct an inspection of all proceedings (both judicial and extrajudicial) against Soviet and foreign citizens convicted for political reasons by military courts ^[57] .

Doctor of Historical Sciences V.P. Motrevich noted that in the 1990s, part of the convicted prisoners of war had to be rehabilitated and counted among the victims of political repression due to the fact that when they were convicted, procedural norms were violated (there was no defense lawyer, etc.) ^{[ 58]} . At the same time, the guilt of prisoners of war rehabilitated by the Chief Military Prosecutor's Office was at times unmistakable. Motrevich cited several examples of such rehabilitated. Unter Feldwebel G. Bartel was the commandant of the camp for Soviet prisoners of war in Berlin, where he created unbearable conditions for them ^[59] . Ober-Efreytor G. Bitsinger participated in punitive operations against the civilian population in the Crimea and during the operation with his participation in the quarries more than 600 civilians were killed ^[60] . Colonel Hans Herzog was sentenced to 25 years in labor camps for punitive operations against Belarusian partisans ^[61] . He categorically refused to work in the camp and could not make him work ^[62] . In May 1992, the Duke was rehabilitated on the basis of the law “On the rehabilitation of victims of political repression” ^[63] .

The specific motives of the prosecutor's office in deciding on the rehabilitation of the Nazis could be completely absent in the decision on rehabilitation. Doctor of Laws A.E. Epifanov, having studied the cases of rehabilitated Nazis, noted that sometimes the prosecutor’s office did not motivate decisions about rehabilitation ^[64] . Epifanov also found that often the decision to rehabilitate was often made solely on the grounds that the guilt of a foreign criminal was based only on his confession (not supported by other evidence) ^[65] . In most cases, employees of the military procuracy, when making a decision on rehabilitation, were guided only by the materials of the criminal case of the criminal, without requesting any additional materials to confirm or deny his guilt ^[66] .

Doctor of Laws A.E. Epifanov concluded that the actions of the military prosecutor’s office for extrajudicial rehabilitation contradicted both Article 13 of the RSFSR Criminal Procedure Code (in force in the 1990s) and Article 118 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation ^[67] . Illegality was expressed in the fact that the military prosecution authorities in fact usurped the right of the court to decide the question of guilt ^[68] .

Since 1998, the decision on the rehabilitation of a foreign war criminal has been made possible only in court. This led to a reduction in the number of rehabilitated. However, even in the 2010s, requests for rehabilitation continued to be received from foreign war criminals. According to the chief prosecutor of Russia S.N. Fridinsky, in 2013, 21 cases were examined against foreign war criminals for their rehabilitation (according to statements including numbers of former German soldiers) ^[69] . All applicants were recognized by a military court non-rehabilitable ^[70] .

The decree of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation of January 21, 1998, terminated the law “On the rehabilitation of victims of political repression” against foreigners convicted by the Decree of the Presidium of the Supreme Soviet of the USSR of April 19, 1943 ^[71] . The Supreme Court of the Russian Federation has indicated that the acts provided for by this Decree do not directly belong to the category of state crimes or those committed for political reasons ^[72] .

Since the ruling of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation of January 21, 1998, all court decisions regarding foreign war criminals could be terminated only with the application of general criminal procedure legislation ^[73] . The extrajudicial rehabilitation period is over.

However, not all Nazi criminals were rehabilitated in 1992-1998. Appeals to the General Prosecutor's Office about the rehabilitation of Nazi criminals were received in the 2010s. Thus, in the first nine months of 2014, the Prosecutor General of the Russian Federation received 117 requests for the rehabilitation of German war criminals ^[74] . According to appeals, the prosecutor's office issued conclusions and forwarded them to the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation. For example, the organization “Saxon Memorial” (represented by representative Zur) appealed to the Prosecutor General’s Office of Russia with a request to rehabilitate Abwehr’s employee, Lieutenant General Hans Pickenbroek , who was sentenced in 1952 to 25 years in labor camps for crimes against the peace and security of mankind ^{[ 74]} . Pickenbroek was released in 1955, received a pension from the German authorities and died in 1959 ^[74] . According to Pickenbrook, the prosecutor's office examined the case, issued a negative opinion on rehabilitation, and on its basis, on 15 November 2014, the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation refused rehabilitation ^[74] .

Some rehabilitation decisions were canceled. In particular, the decision on the rehabilitation of von Pannwitz was canceled ^[74] . Some decisions were reversed decades later. So in February 2018, the prosecutor's office of the Sverdlovsk region, on the complaint of one of the citizens (who learned about this fact at the lecture), canceled the decision on the rehabilitation of G. Y. Bitsinger, who participated in the murder of more than 600 civilians and rehabilitated in 1992 ^[75] .

For the period from October 18, 1991 to January 2001, the bodies of the military prosecutor’s office (according to their own data) on the basis of the Law “On the rehabilitation of victims of political repression” considered more than 17569 appeals of foreigners (mostly Germans) ^[76] . As a result, 13,035 foreigners were recognized as victims of political repression and rehabilitated, while 4,534 foreigners were denied rehabilitation ^[77] . Doctor of Laws A.E. Epifanov notes that the majority of these persons were attracted precisely for the atrocities committed during the years of the Great Patriotic War ^[78] .

• The policy of the Third Reich towards the civilian population in the occupied territories of the USSR