the nationality of all inhabitants of the czech provinces and ...

it was possible, even at that time, to
apply this legal argument. The
constitutive character of the law is
mentioned only in respect of cases of just
retribution after May 4, 1945.
Regarding the overall concept of this
legislation, he requirement was that:
“in every case it is necessary to specify that
the act quoted in Article I is legal: it is not
enough to say that it is not criminal (see,
for example, Article I of Constitutional
Decree 137/1945 Coll.) because then the
positive value of these commendable acts
would not be correctly characterised: they
also have to have expression in the legal
code, and specifically in the criminal law.
The analogy with amnesty does not get to
the root of the matter. In that case it
would really be necessary to change the
name of the law.”
The interpretation based on the
legitimacy of these acts was used verbatim
in the wording of the law. The author also
dealt with the proposals of Deputy Burian
(National Socialist) and with the
proposed amendment of the Club of
Deputies of the Democratic Party which
demanded the omission of the exact time
limits as were proposed in the law. Solnař
recommended that Article I of the law be
worded so: “An act that occurred during
the period from September 30, 1938, to
October 28, 1945, and whose purpose was
to contribute to the fight to restore the
freedom of Czechs and Slovaks, or which
was aimed at just retribution for the acts
of the occupying forces and their
accomplices, is not unlawful, even if it
would be criminal under present
legislation.”
In the next part of his opinion he
proposed a new wording of Article II of
the law, so that the connection with the
common provisions of the criminal
Legal Directives and Constitutional
Decrees concerning the renewal of the
legal order would be specifically
expressed. His proposed wording was
accepted. The law in its final version was
therefore created by the representative of
jurisprudence of the First Republic, a
recognised expert even in German law,
and was not the fruit of political party
debate. In the conclusion of his opinion
The Transfer and its Legal Aspects
259
Chapter VII
the author expressed the view that “acts
listed in Article I substituted for
insufficient public authority, and
therefore, for restitution for any potential
damages to the persons affected by these
acts, similar principles as those for wardamage
restitution should apply.”
Vladimír Solnař’s contribution to the
final wording of the law was praised by
the Committee on Constitutional Law
for Government Legal Proposals and
was referred to by other politicians
during the proceedings subsequently, for
example, Minister Prokop Drtina, and
the rapporteur for the bill, Deputy John.
Concerning the genesis of the law, it is
interesting to consider the sources on
which the authors drew. They were
undoubtedly influenced by laws similar
to those passed in other states. Their
formulation, even in the stated time of
legality and indemnity, reflects the time
of the struggle against Fascism and
Nazism.
The proposal of Vladimír Solnař was
possibly also an answer to Hitler’s decree
of June 7, 1939 (RGBl I. p.1023),
“concerning impunity”. This decree was
printed by Professors Miřička and Solnař
in the year 1939, in New Regulations of
the Criminal Law in the Czech and
Moravian Protectorate. The book
contained German criminal directives
with regard to the fact that, according to
the instructions of the Reich’s Ministers
of Justice and Interior from April 14,
1939, some German criminal laws were
also made binding on those persons who
were not German subjects (therefore also
for subjects of the Protectorate), and
these persons came under the jurisdiction
of German courts. This subjection to
German law corresponded to the model
of the legal relationship of colonial
powers with their native inhabitants.
Later, the power of German law and
German courts over the inhabitants of
the Protectorate spread even further. The
above mentioned decree “of the Führer
and Chancellor of the Reich” declared:
“On the occasion of the return of
Sudeten German territory into the
jurisdiction of the Reich and the taking
of the Protectorate of the Czech lands