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

Chapter VII The Transfer and its Legal Aspects
and Bohemia, I allow the pardoning of
sentences according to the directives
stated later.” These directives distinguish
between where this regulation applies
“for the parts of the Sudetenland which
were returned to the Reich in October
1938. . . and for the Protectorate of
Bohemia and Moravia.”
For acts committed on the thus
defined “Sudeten-German territory”, the
decree stated that the activities of the
NSDAP or the organs of this party, of
the Sudeten-German Party, and other
and similar parties and organisations,
supporting them and helping them, if
these activities are forbidden and
criminal according to Czechoslovak law,
are “also legal in the time before the
return of the Sudetenland to the
German Reich, and the sentences for
these acts are considered unpronounced.”
There was also indemnity “for criminal
acts and misdemeanours which were
committed before December 1, 1938,
during the fight to preserve Germanness
in Sudeten German lands, and for the
return of this territory to the Reich.”
In other provisions the principles listed
were made concrete. In factual terms
“the return of this territory to the Reich”
was a fictional concept, because this
territory never was a part of Germany,
and was always belonged to the Crown
of Bohemia.
It also declared impunity for other acts
and misdemeanours which were
committed “for political motives” by
German subjects and subjects of the
German nation before December 1,
1938. The “legal” motive of these crimes
was the “interests” of Germany. Even
when it concerned the territory of the
Protectorate, they qualified for impunity
for similar reasons, as long as these acts
came under German jurisdiction.
In contrast to the widespread amnesty
declared by the decision of the
government of the Czechoslovak
Republic (led by General Syrový), dated
October 7, 1938, towards Czechoslovak
and foreign citizens of German
nationality for criminal political acts
after the Munich diktat, which as a result
granted these acts indemnity, this decree
260
of Hitler’s differed mainly in that it
considered these acts legal, and therefore
legitimate. According to this, for
example, crimes committed by the
members of the Freikorps against
Czechs, democratic Germans and Jews
from September, 1938, including the
burning of synagogues and the post-
“Munich” stoning and tormenting of the
ex-Mayor of Ústí nad Labem, a German
Social Democrat, by disorderly
Henleinites, became legal.
This broad amnesty of the Czechoslovak
government applied to criminal political
acts which were punishable according to
the Law for Defence of the Republic
(No. 50/1923 Coll.), according to the Law
for Defence of the State No. 31/1936
Coll., according to the Armed Forces
Law No. 193/1920 Coll., according to
the law concerning on the requisition
of transport for military purposes
17/1924 Coll., according to the law on
the right of association and assembly
(Laws 134/1867 and 135/1867). The
amnesty also applied to any criminal act
committed in connection with national
or political struggles, etc. It pardoned all
attacks on Czechoslovak state officials
and on persons defending the
sovereignty and the territorial integrity
of the Czechoslovak state, when attacked
by armed units of German organisations.
Although the government considered
these acts criminal because they led to
the breaking up of the state, nonetheless,
as a result of the Munich diktat, it
pardoned them, while the German
government considered them lawful and
legitimate exactly because they led to the
breaking up of the Czechoslovak state.
The Czechoslovak state had previously
already pardoned many political crimes
committed by German citizens against
the Czechoslovak state – after the start
of Czechoslovakia, and in the middle of
the 1930s. Many Germans considered
this a sign of weakness of the
Czechoslovak state rather than broadmindedness.
At the beginning of loss of freedom,
there were already two different
legitimacies in conflict here – the
legitimacy of Czechoslovak statehood,