Histoire de la Justice au Luxembourg (1795 à nos jours). Institutions - Organisation - Acteurs

Book published by De Gruyter (2022)

National Justice vs. Occupiers’ Justice? A conflict of competence in the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg during World War I

Scientific Conference (2021, September 08)

From the standpoint of international law, the entry of German troops on the territory of the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg in August 1914 violated the small state’s neutrality. While the occupying German ... [more ▼]

From the standpoint of international law, the entry of German troops on the territory of the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg in August 1914 violated the small state’s neutrality. While the occupying German authorities saw this act as an occupatio pacifica and the violation of its neutrality as a necessity in order to respond to a state of emergency, the Luxembourgish government and its justice administration had to cope with a new set of problems. The government, led by state minister Paul Eyschen, and the country’s monarchical leader Marie-Adélaïde pursued a strategy of appeasement towards the occupier, but also attempted to guard the sovereignty of their state as well as of their justice system. With the establishment of German military justice and a central police office in Luxembourg, the sovereignty of Luxembourg’s French-inspired justice was curtailed. However, German authorities made clear that they do not intend to challenge the spheres of local justice, unless cases of military relevance would arise. After all, Luxembourg was a country with close links to the Kaiserreich and an important industrial partner and therefore had to receive a privileged treatment compared to other occupied territories. However, with Luxembourgers being arrested by the German military and German soldiers committing crimes on Luxembourgish ground, the two justice systems, military and local, clashed. Since the status of the “friendly occupation” created legal misunderstandings, local judges, magistrates of the high court (cour supérieure) and German authorities stood in constant correspondence regarding a large amount of court cases and competence disputes. Consequently, in 1915, members of the high magistrate made their way to Frankfurt and Berlin to discuss the status of Luxembourgish justice. These discussions would eventually lead back to the question whether the country was truly to be considered a theater of war (Kriegsschauplatz). Overall, the discussion about the spheres of national and occupier justice became part of a much larger question: What is the legal nature of German occupation in Luxemburg? This paper explores how the two justice systems interacted and highlights court cases where their competences intertwined. These observations show how the local administration had to apply a mix of compromise and pertinacity in order to avoid open conflict but at the same time tried to keep Luxembourgish civilians out of the reach of German military justice. In doing so, several interesting observations can be made regarding the legal discussions between lawyers and prosecutors of both sides. Additionally, the paper offers an insight into a variety of local cases ranging from German soldiers marauding drunkenly on Luxemburgish streets to the arrest of a Luxembourgish judge and amateur historian. Overall, the presented paper attempts to show that while the local justice system was not altered by the occupier, it suffered a cut in its competence in certain spheres of civil justice. However, in comparison to the later Nazi occupation of Luxembourg, local justice administration and its personnel were kept in their place, but had to constantly negotiate certain aspects of civil and international law with the German authorities – often to their own disadvantage. [less ▲]

The Alfred Oppenheimer Testimony and Luxemburg's Master Narrative

Presentation (2019, September 26)

“Nature, thank God, is far more merciful than people”. This memorable statement is taken from Alfred Oppenheimer’s testimony during the Eichmann trial in Jerusalem, in which he describes his ordeals ... [more ▼]

“Nature, thank God, is far more merciful than people”. This memorable statement is taken from Alfred Oppenheimer’s testimony during the Eichmann trial in Jerusalem, in which he describes his ordeals during the war. Alfred Oppenheimer (1901-1993), a Jewish business owner in Luxembourg and later “Eldest of the Jews” during the Occupation by Nazi Germany (1940-1944), has shared his story of perseverance and survival in Theresienstadt and Auschwitz-Birkenau both in the context of trials and in the media. As indicated before, he served as a witness in the Eichmann trial, where he recounted his deportation from Luxembourg and the severe conditions during his imprisonment. In addition to that, he participated in the first war crimes trial in Luxembourg in 1949/50. In fact, as one of the few deported Jews from Luxembourg who survived and returned to the country after 1945, his experiences did not only serve as an essential source for historical and memorial works, but were also integrated into the Grand-Duchy’s national master narrative. They featured in various interviews, documentaries and printed media, especially in the 1980’s and 1990’s. Our presentation aims at exploring the mediatization of Alfred Oppenheimer’s testimony and its significance for Luxembourgish society and its self-perception. We will analyze its use throughout the different stages of postwar public discourse. The immediate postwar period, for instance, was marked mainly by the memory of resistance against the Nazi occupant and by the perspective of Luxembourgish prisoners of war and the forcibly recruited. At that time, Oppenheimer’s account was featured in the Rappel, a journal edited by the LPPD (Ligue luxembourgeoise des prisonniers et déportés politiques) which represented a particular and limited perspective on Luxembourg’s history during the Nazi occupation. Following a slow process of intensifying public debates in other European countries and a growing interest in historical research, public discourse in Luxembourg progressed from a dominantly resistance-driven view to a more differentiated perspective. In this context, Holocaust remembrance became more important and the Jewish victim group started to stand out. The presentation will trace the journey of Alfred Oppenheimer’s testimony throughout Luxemburg’s contemporary history and demonstrate that it is connected to the notion of a new national consciousness after WWII. It will explore how his story moved from the court to the media and how it was told in different outlets throughout society’s path towards understanding its role in the larger context of Nazi occupation, Holocaust and their aftermath in history and memory. [less ▲]

Abortion in the Third Reich: Ideology and the Penal System Concerning Women in the Penal Institution in Saarbrücken, Germany

Presentation (2015, March 21)

With the help of almost 200 dossiers of the Penal Institution in Saarbrücken (Germany) from the period from 1928 to 1944, I examine the situation of imprisoned German women during the Nazi Regime. I am ... [more ▼]

With the help of almost 200 dossiers of the Penal Institution in Saarbrücken (Germany) from the period from 1928 to 1944, I examine the situation of imprisoned German women during the Nazi Regime. I am focusing on the cases of illegal abortions by examining individual cases as well as common ideological and legal conceptions. The dossiers helped me to make conclusions about the gap between ideological ideas concerning the German woman and the complex and dark reality of life conditions for women. Insufficient medical and sexual education along with a legal inferiority shaped the „abortion epidemics“ among lower class women. Secondary and primary sources show that along with the gradual descent of the whole legal system into a system of institutionalized crime, economic conditions also influenced the catastrophic conditions for the pregnant lower class woman. The complexity of the cases is striking: Along with the lack of understanding for the female body, economic misery, legal problems and war, many other factors appear during the research. Pressure from the own family, social norms and Christian morals played a role. Furthermore, men were an essential part of this history as husbands, fathers or rapists. Moreover, abortions developed into a business, as groups of men and women started to help other undergo abortion for money. I also explain the most common procedure of abortion and its risks. [less ▲]