"Legal realities" under nazi occupation of Ukrainian territories: historical and legal aspect of research

Размещено на http://www.allbest.ru/

Dnipropetrovsk State University of Internal Affairs

«Legal realities» under Nazi occupation of Ukrainian territories: historical and legal aspect of research

Kateryna Dolhoruchenko

PhD in Law

Dnipro city, Ukraine

Анотація

Катерина Долгорученко. «ЮРИДИЧНА ДІЙСНІСТЬ» ПІД НАЦИСТСЬКОЮ ОКУПАЦІЄЮ УКРАЇНСЬКИХ ЗЕМЕЛЬ: ІСТОРИКО-ПРАВОВИЙ АСПЕКТ ДОСЛІДЖЕННЯ». Охарактеризовано доктринальні підходи до визначення змісту поняття «юридична дійсність». У широкому розумінні під поняттям юридична дійсність автор пропонує розуміти усю сукупність юридичних феноменів: правових норм, інститутів, правовідносин, правових доктрин, правової ідеології, правової свідомості, поведінки та правового менталітету. У вузькому ж значенні - лише базисні юридичні реалії - норми права - закони (нормативізм), правовідносини, «правові емоції» (правову психологію) та юридичновизначену суспільну (індивідуальну) поведінку.

Запропоновано власний підхід до розуміння змісту категорії «юридична дійсність в умовах нацистської окупації». Означене поняття охоплює весь спектр юридичних феноменів, що існували у конкретному просторово-часовому континуумі - на українських територіях у період нацистської окупації.

Право в умовах окупації за своєю сутністю стає дисфункціональним. Зберігаючи мову і зовнішні ознаки позитивного права, зміст його був зведений до постулатів нацистської злочинної ідеології. Таке «неправо» виконувало декілька функцій: це - легітимація нацистського окупаційного режиму, мобілізація людських мас для виконання поставлених режимом завдань, а також функція «морального знеболювання», що мало виправдовувати перед широким загалом злочини окупантів. Доведено, що конформізм або «пристосування» стало способом адаптації суспільства до складних умов соціального буття та антизаконності в умовах гітлерівської окупації українських територій. Сформульовано авторську позицію щодо методологічної коректності вживання цього поняття в історико-правових дослідженнях. Якщо в теорії та філософії права допустима підміна нетотожних понять реальність та дійсність, то у історико-правових дослідженнях, предмет яких обумовлений історичною ретроспективою, коректним буде вживання саме поняття дійсність.

Ключові слова: юридична дійсність, нацистська окупація, Рейхскомісаріат «Україна».

Abstract

Doctrinal procedure of definition of the meaning of «Legal realities» is characterized. Here is suggested an own procedure of understanding of the category meaning as «legal realities under Nazi occupation period». It is proven, that a definable conception covers all of the spectrum of legal phenomena, which existed in a particular space-time continuum - on Ukrainian Territories under Nazi occupation. Author's position of methodological specificity of this concept usage in historical and legal researches is worded.

Keywords: legal realities, Nazi occupation, Reichskommissariat «Ukraine».

Relevance of the study

To the present day array of ontological and epistemological problems connected with legal understanding or understanding of legal phenomena and processes remain undetermined, particularly in terms of historical retrospective. Historians often make inaccuracies in usage of meanings like legal reality and the validity in historical context of the past. It is especially about degree of uncertainty of correct using meanings «legal realities» or «the validity» studying public phenomena and processes of period of Hitler's occupation of Ukraine.

Recent publications review

Definition of content of meanings «legal realities» and «validity», in particular, under occupation was observed with very attention by foreign and domestic researchers of the theory, the philosophy and the law history.

Essential issues of category «legal reality» and separation of its conceptual features were observed by researches, such as S. Alekseev, N. Butakova, M. Kelman, D. Kemirov, N Mazutov, A. Pavlyk, E. Popov, S. Slobodenyk, V. Nersesyants, G. Ostroumov, O. Hoffe, Yavich.

Correlation issues of «legal reality» and «validity» terminology are not paid very attention by theorists, but some aspects of a problem are presented in works of O. Danilyan, M. Kostytsky, S. Maksymov, K. Milkov, V. Savenko, S. Slyvka, S. Slobodnyuk, O. Petrov and others.

As for analysis of legal phenomena and processes which were happening during periods of Nazi occupation of Ukrainian territories and World War Two, and researches on this issue is still going on. By the deep scientific analysis of given issue differs works of A. Bolyanovsky, O. Goncharenko, I. Dereiko, T. Vronska, I. Shchupak and others.

The research paper's objective is to analyze general procedures of understanding the meaning of «legal realities under Nazi occupation» and find out the questions of methodological correctness of using this category especially in historical and legal researches.

To achieve set goal, author uses this algorithm of research:

analysis of main scientific methods for understanding «legal realities» under Nazi occupation;

determination of the definition of «legal realities under Nazi occupation»;

explaining a scientific appropriateness of using a collocation «legal realities under Nazi occupation» in historical and legal researches.

Discussion

The essential meaning of «reality» often uses as synonym of «being» and understands like «substance in all of its shape variety (objective reality)», which is opposed to subjective reality. This category usually uses when showing processes of occurrence, formation and development in nature, society and in mind, considering dialect tonality of their correlation. Namely, reality - it is everything that not only exist, but do, operates, expresses its own essential and regularity of development. legal mentality occupation law

This way M. Kostytsky, within the limits of the ontology of law, determined the legal reality not as a system of universal mandatory rules, taken and authorized by the government as a formal equality, general and necessary measure of freedom and universal justice [6, p. 22-23].

V. Sirih also pays attention to essential part of the meaning of «legal reality». Scientist takes a position that the meaning of «reality» has to define essential aspect of being, logical and accidental, probable, possible and necessary in it.

Modern scientists O. Danilyan, L. Bayrachna and O. Dzioban comprehend meaning of «legal reality» as a special autonomous world of the law with its own rules, functional logic and development where «the basic construction is the law» [4. p. 107].

Analyzing the structure of legal system (reality), S. Maximov shows the following conclusions - «independent and self-sustaining elements of legal reality are: its own law, natural, and positive; a legal education; legal tradition and legal legacy; legal experience, legal mentality, legal tendency, prediction of the law [7, p. 61].

V. Savenko under the term of legal reality understands a complex of static and dynamic phenomena and processes in a particular space-time continuum, where its static aspects of legal regulations, legal institutes and principles (regulative side of legal system); law-making, the law enforcement (an organizing side of legal system); legal views, ideas, conceptions (ideological side of legal system), when the dynamic is law-making and law enforcement agencies, principals of organization and efforts of judicial and other governmental agencies [8, p. 61].

According to V. Savenko, the legal content of the category of legal reality is revealed in the following structural planes:

intellectual and psychological (includes legal mentality, legal science, customs, traditions, empirical knowledge, legal culture, etc.);

regulatory (includes a system of legal norms and public relations);

socio-regulatory (includes the level of affiliation to the legal reality of the opportunities it has)

organizational active (includes all types of legal behavior);

law-making, law enforcement practice, the activity of citizens and governmental agencies within the rule of law etc.) [8, p.62].

On the contrary O. Bernyukov focuses on the essential content of the category «legal reality», believing that particularly this collocation is the methodologically correct while observing historical past.

The author interprets this category as a being which formed as a result of the exploration of the law through its external replication through the special localized formation of the interpretation system in the face of the special mechanism (structure) form of genetically related with other connected phenomena in the branching of their communication with other related phenomena and facts, which follow from them [1, p. 61].

The main structural elements of this construction, according to the scientist, are jus naturale (as a basic fundament) and legislation (its bearing walls). Accordingly, the elements of this ontognoseological phenomenon include, first of all, legal awareness, order, law enforcement agencies. That is, everything connected with the cognitive process of realization in our society [3, p. 62].

Petrov by legal reality means not so much the existence of law itself, as a system of interaction, mutual development and mutual functioning of legal phenomena, which may not contain a positive - legal content.

Relatively, O. Petrov identifies the following features of legal reality, exactly:

the ability to play the role of a special sphere of a public life, along with economic, political, etc.;

2 coverage of both promising and retrospective phenomena and processes that have a legally defined essence.

Considering the analysis of the main scientific approaches to understanding the concept of «the validity», there is a need to outline the author's position of the methodological correctness of its use in historical and legal researches.

The category «the validity» is logically used to denote the feasible processes of origin, formation and development of public life in the legal sphere, given the dialectical, causal nature of their relationship.

The concept of the validity covers the full range of legal phenomena that existed in a particular space-time continuum from the side of historical retrospect.

In a broad sense, the validity is the whole set of legal phenomena: legal doctrines, institutions, legal relations, legal ideology, legal consciousness, behavior and legal mentality.

In the narrow sense, by the validity we understand only basic legal realities - law norms - laws (normativism), legal relations, «legal emotions» (legal psychology) and legally defined social (individual) behavior.

One of the most important defining features of the validity that was developed during the Nazi occupation is its illegal nature.

Germany's war against the Soviet Union was accompanied by mass terror and genocide against the civilians, colossal devastation, destruction and robbing of property. The main means of managing the occupied territories was physical and moral terror. The Nazi military- police apparatus organized extermination of the population, created intolerable conditions for survival, and sentenced it to extinction.

The occupying power used the force of the Gestapo (police), the SS (armed forces) and the SD (security service) to restore so-called order. They were given the exclusive right to shoot without trial and investigation all those who opposed the Nazi regime. By the special order of the Commander-in-Chief of the German troops (summer 1941), Wehrmacht servicemen were allowed to open fire without warning on those who violate the curfew, avoid registration, take in non-natives, do not report «Bolsheviks and bandits», hide weapons and approaches closer than 100 km to the railway line, etc. [5, p. 18].

The occupiers actively involved all volunteers from the local population in criminal cooperation, forming them into SD-controlled «local self-government» and the police, which were used to collect taxes, fight the local underground and exterminate the Jews. The main duty of Ukrainians was to become absolute work in favor of the German Reich.

The population in the harsh conditions of occupation was to some extent aware of the hopelessness and failure of the fighting against the Nazi regime. Thus, a public position was gradually formed on the need to comply with the demands and orders of the occupiers for the sake of survival or satisfaction of personal needs and interests, which manifested itself in the form of social moral and legal conformism.

As V. Gorobets rightly points out, moral and legal conformism became a strategy of the survival of the majority under Nazi occupation. The author emphasizes that survival sometimes took the form of an open resistance or, conversely, collaborationist but mainly forms of adaptation [3, p. 72]. That is, «conformism» or «adaptation» becomes a way of adapting society to the complex conditions of social life and illegality. Public legal conformism becomes an essential feature of the validity under Nazi occupation.

Therefore, on the territory of the Reichskommissariat «Ukraine» the law was dysfunctional. Preserving the language and external signs of positive law, its sense was led to the postulates of Nazi criminal ideology. This «unlaw» performed several functions: the legitimation of the Nazi occupation regime, the mobilization of the masses to complete the tasks set by the regime, and the function of «moral painkiller», which was to justify the general crimes of the occupiers.

In fact, the validity under the Nazi occupation gained a number of specific features, such as:

reflection of public consciousness, anti-legal in its sense, phenomena and processes of reality that developed during the war and the Nazi occupation regime;

dominance of social behavior (individual or social group), characterized by moral and legal conformism;

mass increasing of negative of public sentiments, motives, attitudes, beliefs, which led to the radicalization of legally significant behavior of the population under occupation;

progressive substitution (replacement) of legal and moral norms by national socialistic ideology and vital necessity;

terror and adaptation become the main forms of ensuring «legality» and «order» in the conditions of the occupation;

legal practice was explained by the norms of the laws (imperial German, Soviet and occupying), which were in charge within the Reichskommissariat «Ukraine»;

the subjects of the validity were citizens of the URSR, «Reichsdeutsche» (citizens of the Third Reich), «Volksdeutsche» (ethnic Germans living in the Reich Commissariat who were given personal rights), some national minorities, especially Jews and Gypsies who were deprived by the Nazis of any rights and freedoms, as well as administrative, police, punitive and repressive and judicial agencies of the occupying power, local authorities that executed legal activity.

Conclusions

Under the term of «the validity appeared under the Nazi occupation», within historical and legal research, the author proposes to understand the type of specific non- legal existence, which was a complex system of layers of traditional positive legal ideas, ideas of Soviet law and Nazi doctrine of law, which was based on the principle of the supremacy of the fuhrer's will over the law, the ideas of the exclusive right of Germans to expand the living «space», the ideas of state chauvinism and racism, as well as Soviet, German and occupation laws in force within the Reichskommissariat «Ukraine» socially useful lawful and illegal behavior of the population, which determined the specifics of legal life in the occupation.

Список використаних джерел

1. Бернюков А. Юридична реальність: монограф. Хмельницький : ЦНИ. 2016. 389 с.

2. Вронська Т. Феномен «пособництва»: до проблеми кваліфікації співпраці цивільного населення з окупантами у перший період Великої Вітчизняної війни. Сторінки воєнної історії України: зб. наук. статей. Київ : Ін-т історії України НАН України. 2008. Вип. 11. С. 88-97.

3. Горобець В. Співпраця з ворогом як вимушена модель поведінки та стратегія виживання. Грані війни. Військово-історичний меридіан. 2011. №3. С. 56-73.

4. Данильян О., Байрачна Л., Дзьобань О. Словник основних філософських термінів. Київ : Абрис, 2002. 308 с.

5. Косик В. Україна у Другій світовій війні у документах : зб. нім. архівних матеріалів (1941-1942) : в 3 т. Т. 3. Львів : Ін-т українознавства ім. І. Крип'якевича НАН України. 1999. С. 15-20.

6. Костицький М. Ключові підходи до методології пізнання української історико-правової дійсності. Науково-інформаційний вісник. Серія Право. 2005. №12. С.12-17.

7. Максимов С. Класична і некласична моделі осмислення правової реальності. Право України. 2014. № 1. С. 61-68.

8. Савенко В. Правова реальність як структурована площина реалізації права. Філософські та методологічні проблеми права. № 1-2 (9-10). 2015. С. 57-66.

9. Bernyukov, A. (2016) Yurydychna real'nist' [Legal reality]: monohrafiya. Khmel'nyts'kyy : TsNTI. 389 p. [in Ukr.].

10. Vrons'ka, T. (2008) Fenomen «posobnytstva»: do problemy kvalifikatsiyi spivpratsi tsyvil'noho naselennya z okupantamy u pershyy period Velykoyi Vitchyznyanoyi viyny [The phenomenon of «assistance»: to the problem of qualification of cooperation of the civilian population with the occupiers in the first period of the Great Patriotic War]. Storinky voyennoyi istoriyi Ukrayiny : zb. nauk. statey. Kyiv : In-t istoriyi Ukrayiny NAN Ukrayiny. Issue 11, pp. 88-97. [in Ukr.].

11. Horobets', V. (2011) Spivpratsya z vorohom yak vymushena model' povedinky ta stratehiya vyzhyvannya [Cooperation with the enemy as a forced model of behavior and survival strategy]. Hrani viyny. Viyskovo-istorychnyy merydian. № 3, pp. 56-73. [in Ukr.].

12. Danyl'yan, O., Bayrachna, L., Dz'oban', O. (2002) Slovnyk osnovnykh filosofs'kykh terminiv [Dictionary of basic philosophical terms]. Kyiv : Abrys, 308 p. [in Ukr.].

13. Kosyk, V. (1999) Ukrayina u Druhiy svitoviy viyni u dokumentakh [Ukraine in the Second World War in documents] : zb. nim. arkhivnykh materially (1941-1942) : v 3 t. T. 3. L'viv : In-t ukrayinoznavstva im. I. Kryp'yakevycha NAN Ukrayiny, pp. 15-20. [in Ukr.].

14. Kostyts'kyy, M. (2005) Klyuchovi pidkhody do metodolohiyi piznannya ukrayins'koyi istoryko-pravovoyi diysnosti [Key approaches to the methodology of learning the Ukrainian historical and legal reality]. Naukovo-informatsiynyy visnyk. SeriyaPravo. №12, pp.12-17. [in Ukr.].

15. Maksymov, S. (2014) Klasychna i neklasychna modeli osmyslennya pravovoyi real'nosti [Classical and non-classical models of understanding legal reality]. Pravo Ukrayiny. № 1, pp. 61-68. [in Ukr.].

16. Savenko, V. (2015) Pravova real'nist' yak strukturovana ploshchyna realizatsiyi prava [Legal reality as a structured plane of law implementation]. Filosofs'ki ta metodolohichni problemy prava. № 1-2 (9-10), pp. 57-66. [in Ukr.].

Размещено на Allbest.ru