1. No category

MAIN CHARACTERISTICS OF THE JUDICIAL SYSTEM AS MAIN TOOL OF
REPRESSION IN SLOVENIA BETWEEN 1945 AND 1951
Žiga Koncilija, young researcher, Institute for Contemporary History in Ljubljana,
Slovenija
ABSTRACT
At the end of the Second World War communist party held the main levers of the
legislative and executive powers. Of special importance was its control over the repressive
apparatus, especially over the judicial system, security service and military. The observed
period is seen as the period of the most intense and thorough changes in the system and
society as well as a period of intense repression, which lessens at the beginning of the 50’s. In
first phase of repression there were extrajudicial killings, later on regime focuses on political
trials as an important component of the new ideological and political system. Approximately
20.000 potential or actual class and political opponents went through the courts and
approximately 8.000 of these are thought to have been convicted. They were conducted before
military courts, Court of National Honour and later before regular judiciary. The main
purposes of political trials had been epuration with important political and symbolic role Main
characteristics of judicial system were layman judges, connection of courts with governmental
and political institutions, prevalent role of prosecution and secret service. Trials against
explicitly political opponents were conducted in several phases and can be roughly divided
into three or four categories (occupiers, collaborators, “internal” enemies).
Key words: repression, communism, judiciary, political trials, political opponents
1
MAIN CHARACTERISTICS OF THE JUDICIAL SYSTEM AS MAIN TOOL OF
REPRESSION IN SLOVENIA BETWEEN 1945 AND 1951
INTRODUCTION
The Second World War represents an important 20th Century milestone in the
sociopolitical evolution of Europe and Slovenia within it. 1 After the First World War Slovenia
threw off the Austrian-Hungarian yoke and started 80-years long Jugoslavian »adventure«. 2
The dreams about united and sovereign state disappeared already at the beginning of this
adventure. The idea of unified Slovenia had been buried soon after on november 1920 with
Rapallo agreement, same happened to the requests for wider autonomy inside Kingdom of
SHS and Kingdom of Jugoslavia. Second World War, as far as territorial integrity is
concerned, brought at least partial unification. Political structure of the kingdom was under
threat firstly from left and, with the Second World War approaching, also from right wing
radicalism. Leftists were suscesfully suppresed, meanwhile right wing radicalism flirted with
governing elites. From that »clash« the communists, through sucsessfull execution of National
Liberation Movement (NLM), rose as victorious power which gave them opportunity for
radical postwar political revolution and social engineering. Parlamentary democracy, which
was in fact abolished on 6th of January 1929, gradualy whithered away and with new
Jugoslaw constitution the kingdom had been finally abolished. At the end of the war, the
population had to, in addition to the military and civilian losses, problems of supplying food,
clothing and shelter, as well as material devastation, face the challenge of establishing a new
system modelled on the example of Soviet Union. The 9th of May 1945, accompanied with the
enthusiasm of the victors and the fear of the defeated, foretold numerous political, social,
economic, cultural and demographic changes that have essentially altered the Slovenian
federal unit and its social structure. On 29th of November 1945 the Federal People’s Republic
of Yugoslavia was founded, declared as a system of people’s democracy, but in actuality it
was a unilateral dictate under the leadership of the Communist Party (CP).
For one part of the population, the postwar period was marked by reconstruction in the
hope of a better and more just life in the new socialist arrangement, but for all those
individuals and entire political, class or social groups that represented an obstacle in the
1
About postwar Europe see more: Tony Judt, A History of Europe since 1945, London, 2007.
About Jugoslavija see more: Jože Pirjevec, Jugoslavija (1918-1992) - nastanek, razvoj ter razpad
Karadjordjevićeve in Titove Jugoslavije, Koper, 1995 also; Peter Vodopivec, Od Pohlinove slovnice do
samostojne države - slovenska zgodovina od konca 18. stoletja do konca 20. stoletja, Ljubljana 2010.
2
2
execution of the socialist revolution, it meant a period of intensified repression. Because the
CP arose as the victorious political power out of the chaos of the Second World War by
having successfully conducted the National Liberation Struggle (NLS) and by craftily
wielding politics inside the Liberation Front (LF), by the end of the war it already held the
main levers of the legislative and executive powers. 3 Of special importance was its control
over the repressive apparatus, especially over the judical system, security service and
military. 4 With this in hand the doors for radical transformation of society and execution of
social engineering were wide open. On the other hand, this transformation inevitabily brought
intensified repression for all of those who opposed it. We can find the cause of repression
»…in the fact, that leninist state, as social state in the first phase of its development, in which
communist party rules as self-proclaimed leading avantgard force with its right to be
prevalent, since they know the rules of social development and therefeore capable of creating
new socialist society of justice and equality. That is the reason why they cannot allow its
citizens to live as independent and free individuals. And this is not because of their
malevolence, but for their intent, to create society on the artificial basis of beforehand
constructed ideas about social relationships, ignoring the real facts.« 5
The observed period is seen as the period of the most intense and thorough changes in
the system and society. Therefore the fact that this was also the period of the worst repression
in socialist Yugoslavia is not surprising, though the repression was later somewhat mitigated,
at the beginning of the 1950s. The intensity of the repression fluctuated parallel with the
levels of the socialist construction project and was in inverse proportion to the power of
control held by the CP and we must not neglect the external political factors (The Cold War
(Austria, Trst and Berlin question), The Informbiro dispute in 1948, etc.). According to the
research on victims of the Second World War, conductet by the Institute of Contemporary
History in Ljubljana, in the first and most brutal period of repression in summer 1945
approximately 13.898 soldiers and civilians lost their lives in extrajudicial killings, a number
that amounts to an approximate 15% share of all Slovenian casualties in the Second World
War. 6 Afterwards, the judicial processes entered the scene as the main instruments of
3
See more in: Jera Vodušek-Starič, Prevzem oblasti 1944-1946, Ljubljana, 1992.
Zdenko Čepič, Ključne značilnosti slovenske politike v letih 1929-1955, Znanstveno poročilo, Inštitut za
novejšo zgodovino, Ljubljana, 1995, str. 84.
5
France Bučar, Govor na zasedanju Evropskega parlamenta v Strasbourgu, 20. januarja 1988. V: Ferjančič
Roman, Brezpravje, Nova Revija, Ljubljana 1998, str. 13.
6
Godeša, Bojan, Mlakar, Boris, Šorn, Mojca, Tominšek Rihtar, Tadeja: Žrtve druge svetovne vojne v
Sloveniji. V: Prispevki za novejšo zgodovino, 30, 2002, št. 1 , str. 121–130.
4
3
repression. Approximately 20.000 potential or actual class and political opponents went
through the courts and approximately 8.000 of these are thought to have been convicted. 7
Postwar political trials and extrajudicial killings were characteristic for most european
countries. Boris Mlakar is stating that this so called epuration had important political and
symbolic role with which new governing elites tried to gain political legitimacy, as if to say
that this was in fact moral duty of new goverment as function of reinstating legal an just order
as well as a method of strenghtening the confidence in democracy. 8 However we have to add
here that this was the case in Western European countries. In newly established socialist
countries the cleansing was mostly used as the mean of settling the scores with ideological as
well as class opponents and that is why it also lasted longer.
THE JUDICIAL SYSTEM AS THE MAIN INSTRUMENT OF REPRESSION
If we take Althusser's theory of represive apparatus, we define it as those systems and
structures of society which control production relations mostly through repressive and phisical
methods. The most important tools of state repression according to that theory are:
government, police, judicial system, prisons and army. 9 In this paper we are mostly interested
in functioning of courts as well as penal legislation which is the first focal point when we
observe government overturns or revolution. After the first phase of extrajudicial liquidations,
the government redirected its execution of repression through the reformed judicial system. I
distinguish couple of reasons why is that so. The first reason lies in the fact that, by resorting
to judicial system they tried to restrict harsh arbitrary acts of revenge thus improving their
image in the eyes of public at home as well as international community. The second lies in the
fact that the political trials, besides resorting to direct violence, represents the fastest way of
dealing with opponents and thus offering a way to complete control over society and people‘s
lives. And the third lies in the fact that the government can, through a skilled manipulation of
the people through courts and new legislation, establish a new balance of powers and
legitimate the new government. The situation was no different in Slovenia, therefore let’s take
a brief look at the developmental process of the legislative and judiciary. Between May and
7
Božo Repe, Povojni sodni procesi. V: Zbornik referatov in razprave s simpozija Povojna zgodovina na
Slovenskem, Koroški pokrajinski muzej, Slovenj Gradec 1992, str. 54-63.
8
Boris Mlakar: Epuracija in povojne žrtve v Zahodni Evropi. V: Prispevki za novejšo zgodovino, 36, 1996, 1–2,
str. 202.
9
Louis Althusser, Izbrani spisi, Založba cf., Ljubljana, 2000, str. 53-111.
4
September 1945 people were trialed exclusively before military courts, between 5th of June
and 25th of August Court of National Honour was established, and in September 1945, a
regular judiciary was finally organized.
Military courts were in operation immediately after the end of the war. 10 At first they
were formed as occasional military courts in units, then as extraordinary courts, and from fall
1943 onward also as general regular courts. The basic document underlying the operations of
the military judiciary was the so called Decree concerning the protection of the Slovenian
nation and its movement for liberation and unification adopted in 16th September 1941 which
represented the basic document of the Communist repression, as it has, among other
measures, defined the category of national traitor, the prescribed punishments and the judicial
process for the protection of the Slovenian nation and its liberation movement. The
punishment was a death sentence and the procedure ought to be swift, verbal and secret. With
this decree: “…the resistance movement bestowed on itself the power to take extraordinary
measures, originating from the sovereignty of the people.” 11 The organization of the military
judiciary reached its peak in 20th April 1944 with the Decree concerning military courts. This
decree determined the jurisdictions of military courts, “…for all criminal acts of a military
and non-military character committed by members of the liberation mowement and also
civilian persons.” Military courts could have ruled a reprimand, the seizure of property,
eviction from the domicile, forced labour, heavy forced labour, loss of civil rights and the
death punishment by shooting. After the war in August 1945 their jurisdictions were restricted
to military personnel and delicts connected with military crimes.
Between 5th of June and 25th of August 1945, markedly revolutionary courts were
established in the spirit of epuration, lasting for the period until the formation of the regular
judiciary. With the Court of National Honour (CNH), 12 they grounded the concepts of
national honour and national shame (cowardice, indifference, unreliability and treason).13
They judged those that were supposed to have harmed the reputation and honour of the
10
See more in: Damijan Guštin, Razvoj vojaškega sodstva slovenskega odporniškega gibanja 1941-1945. V:
Prispevki za novejšo zgodovino, 2004, št. 1, str. 49-63. Tadeja Tominšek Čehulič, Partizansko sodstvo v
Sloveniji med drugo svetovno vojno: kaznovalna politika in vprašanje smrtnih kazni, str.83-95. V:Prispevki za
novejšo zgodovino, letnik XLVIX, št. 2, 2009.
11
Guštin, Razvoj vojaškega sodstva slovenskega odporniškega gibanja 1941-1945, str. 52.
12
Več glej v: Milko Mikola, Sodišče slovenske narodne časti, Arhivi, 16, št. 1-2, str. 15-16.
Čoh Mateja, V imenu slovenskega naroda: krivi!, diplomsko delo, Maribor 1998. Božo Repe, Povojni sodni
procesi, str. 55-56. V: Zbornik Povojna zgodovina na Slovenskem, str. 54-63.
13
Ljudska pravica, 8.6.1945, uvodnik »O narodni časti«.
5
Slovenian nation because of their cooperation with the occupiers in the political, propaganda,
artistic, economic and administrative sphere. Beside loss of national honour, light or heavy
forced labour (up to ten years) convicts could also get a punishment of partial or full seizure
of property. This last punishment, groups of people accused, practical administration of the
courts and not returnig confiscated property indicates that CNH were mostly intended for
wide confiscations of private property. In september 1945, as a result of trials before military
courts and CNH allmost 90% of slovenian industry had been nationalized. 14
A regular judiciary was established in September 1945, composed of: the Supreme
Court in Ljubljana, district courts in Celje, Ljubljana, Maribor and Novo Mesto, and 26 local
courts.
CRIMINAL LEGISLATION
If we return to the supplementation of the criminal or penal legislation. In February
1945 a regulation was adopted that abolished all regulations of the Kingdom of Yugoslavia
and the occupiers, except those that were not in contradiction with new political principles.
But because it did not define what was legal and what not, a very arbitrary interpretation of
legal regulation began to be brought into force. The void in the field of criminal legislation
was therefore supplemented in 1945 with: the Law on suppressing illicit speculation and
economic sabotage, the Law on protecting the people’s property, the Law on prohibiting the
provocation of national, racial and religious hatred, the Law on the types of punishments and
the Law on punishable acts against the people and the state. In February 1948 a new penal
code took effect, but it was only a general part and not a complete code. It contained 106
articles and was made after the model of Soviet law. The orientation of the code clearly
reflects the values that were protected by criminal law. Usually this can be made out from the
criminal acts themselves, which are declared by the law as such, as well as from the
punishments. But here the first article explicitly notes the value of protecting the people’s
state built on the accomplishments of NLM its legal order and socialist construction. The
rights of its citizens stood in the second place. The purpose of punishment had been also
explicitly stated: “The suppression of activity that is dangerous to society, deterrence of the
perpetrator from criminal acts and their prevention; re-education and correction of the
14
Jera Vodušek Starič, Ozadje sodnih procesov v Sloveniji v prvem povojnem letu. V: Prispevki za novejšo
zgodovino, 32, 1992, str. 139-153.
6
perpetrator; the general educational influence on other members of the society, so that they
would turn away from criminal acts.” 15 The law determined 12 types of punishments. In
March 1951, a complete penal code with 362 articles was adopted. This time, the citizen was
put in the first place, and the state, its independence, security, social establishment and legal
order in the second, which points towards a mitigation of the political repression. The number
of punishments was reduced to seven. 16
CHARACTERISTICS OF THE ADMINISTRATION OF THE COURTS
The actual revolutionary nature of the judiciary can be evident from several
characteristics. First one was the introduction of layman judges which was aimed at giving
precedence to judges with moral instead of professional qualifications. The basic goal of the
government through the institute of non-jurist judges was to place politically firm people on
fundamental positions. For illustrational purposes, in 1947 the portion of non-jurist judges,
compared with the total number of judges, amounted to approximately 17% (31 of 186). 17
The shortcomings of the institute of laymen judges started to show in the incorrect use of
legal provisions and the ruling of punishments, the meting out of punishments, which were
not even known by the Law on the types of punishments or in meting out such severities of
punishments that were not permitted by the law. A large portion of the judicial cadre was
taken over from previous regime, which also meant those who disagreed with the new
establishment. Because the new judges were supposed to fulfil political conditions in addition
to professional ones, they tried to solve the situation through re-education or transfer of older
judges to other posts and by filling the vacant posts with young politically firm judges as well
as exercising pressure on existing judges. 18
The revolutionary nature of the judiciary is most obviously reflected in the connection
of courts with governmental and political institutions. The courts were in close connection
with local committees that were in mutual coordination and cooperation. The most obvious
characteristic which clearly denies the principle of indepedence of judiciary is strong role of
the prosecution and secret service, both of them were directly connected to the communist
15
Uradni list FLRJ, 3, št. 106, 13. december 1947, str. 1465.
Jelka Melik, Razvoj kazenskega prava na slovenskem od 1848 do danes, str.192-195. V: Malefične svoboščine
Ljubljančanov, Gradivo in razprave 25, Ljubljana, Graz 2004, str. 185-200.
17
Lovro Šturm (ur.), Brezpravje, Slovensko pravosodje po letu 1945, Nova Revija, 1998 Ljubljana, str. 20.
18
Šturm, Brezpravje, str. 16-26.
16
7
party. That is why from the very beginning first-rate political cadres were appointed to the
posts of prosecutors and agents. The Administration of State Security (ASS) kept a vigilant
eye on the prosecution, had an independent powers and monopoly over political delicts. With
the means of psychic and physical pressure it pursued only one goal in criminal procedures –
the confession of the accused as “the queen of all evidence”. 19 In such circumstances the
courts relied on public prosecutors to such an extent that they adhered to the indictments made
by public prosecutions and uncritically copied the dispositives of the verdicts right out of the
indictments and indictment proposals. The role of defence counsels was small and in cases,
when the decision of the court was already ideologically-politically predetermined, or, when
the judges adopted the arguments of public prosecutors, the defence counsels had no actual
role at all. 20
POLITICAL TRIALS
According to the opinion of the historian dr. Božo Repe, »…the post-war judicial
processes, and especially political trials, were an important component of the new ideological
and political system.« 21 They became a kind of, »…institution of the political system, a
principal means of achieving »victories« in actual sociopolitical confrontations, but also in
anticipated, supposed, or only imagined confrontations.« 22
But which judiciary processes can be identified as political trials. Sometimes it was
very hard to distinguish between political and non-political trials since there was tendency in
this period between 1945 and 1951 to mark, whether actual or potential political, class or any
other opponents as the enemy of the “people” and new socialist order. Almost every
committed criminal act (collaboration, negative propaganda, illicite speculation, sabotage,
rejection of new agrarian laws…) could have been marked as a threat to the new socialist
order and that is why we can say that the basis had been often political and not professional.
In reality this actually meant that anybody could have been arbitrary charged for acts against
the state and so harshly punished. The fact that proves this penal policy is for example number
of people accused of committing political criminal acts. Before 1951, when new penal code
19
As Andrey Vishinsky state prosecutor of Stalin show trials once said.
Šturm, Brezpravje, str. 26-33.
21
Božo Repe, Politična represija v socialistični Sloveniji. V: Prispevki za novejšo zgodovino, Letnik XLIV, št.1,
Ljubljana 2004, str. 86.
22
Šturm, Brezpravje, str. 32.
20
8
was accepted, courts accused around 1000 people per year, in 1952 the number dropped to
207, in 1953 to 91 and in 1954 to only 44 persons. 23 If we look at the death penalties, the
pattern is also the same. Between 1945 and 1951 courts declared 211 death penalties from
which 203 were on charges of political criminal acts and after 1951 there is no more death
penalties for such delicts. 24
Political trials had very different modes of execution as well as different causes and
consequences. Fundamental characteristic however can be found in the tendency of new
ruling elite to charge all real and potential enemies with guilt for acts identified as criminal
acts against new state, people and socialist system. So the main purposes of political trials had
been epuration with important political and symbolic role. New communist elite tried to gain
legitimacy, consolidate power and nationalise private property. We can identify two big
targeted groups. Firstly, there were obvious political opponents; occupiers, national traitors,
politicians from former regimes, opposition inside the Front and other political opponents
(especially Church). And the second big group could be marked as class opponents
(industrialists, merchants, craftsmen and farmers). This categories of the accused often
interwove in group “show” processes so that indicements could have been blured. A special
role was played by the principle of a public conduct of the main hearing. The purpose of this
was that the public, which followed the participant who conducted the main hearing, that is,
the public prosecutor, represented a means of pressuring the judge, the judges, the defence
counsel and also the accused. ASS also put a great effort in directing the process and
afterwards listening to the reaction of people in which way is people opinion moving. The
punishments for acts against the state were high, but they were often reduced later on which
points out another purpose of these trials, intimidation of the people.
According to Repe, political trials have been executed on three main basis: on the
basis of collaboaration (national traitors), on the basis of class affiliation (as a result of civil
war and socialist revolution) and on the national basis (this concerns mostly german minority
which had been diminished after the war). 25
23
Mateja Režek, Neodvisnost sodstva na preizkušnji, Pravosodje in sistem politične kazenske represije v
Jugoslaviji (1948-1959). V: Zgodovina za vse, 9, št.1, 2002, str. 88.
24
Prav tam, str. 88.
25
Božo Repe, Politična represija v socialistični Sloveniji, str. 85.
9
MAIN PROCESSES AGAINST THE CATEGORIES OF POLITICAL OPPONENTS
Trials against explicitly political opponents were conducted in several phases and can
be roughly divided into three or four categories. The central process against foreign war
criminals was conducted before the military court in June 1947 when Friedrich Rainer 26 and
13 high-ranking national socialist functionaries and military persons were tried for crimes
committed during the German occupation in Slovenia between 1941 and 1945. For the
category of collaborators with the occupiers two processes were of most importance. In
December 1945 there was “Christmas trial” 27 where 34 influential members of the anticommunist camp were tried, 5 of them priests. Two were acquitted, five were sentenced to
death by hanging, eleven to death by shooting (only one of which was carried out) and the
others to a deprivation of personal liberty for a period of 10 to 20 years. Another important
process against the collaborators was in August 1946 against the Home Guard general Leon
Rupnik 28 and his associates, also against the bishop of Ljubljana Gregorij Rožman. Three of
them were sentenced to death by hanging and shooting.
In 1946 after having taken care of the collaborators, the main effort of the repression
directed against the opposition inside the Front. Between 1945 and 1951 there were 35 ilegal
bandit or terroristic groups which were accused of counterrevolutionary activities and as such
trialed. The main trial was against 17 members of Poklačeva band on October 1947 in Celje.
One of the biggest show trials against “internal” enemies was the Nagode trial 29 which was
conducted between the 29th of July and the 18th of August 1947 in Ljubljana. The bill of
indictment charged the Nagode group with the attempt to found a legal opposition against the
people's government, cooperation with foreign intelligence services, connecting with hostile
emigration, of intelligence activity and inaccurate representation of the circumstances in
Slovenia and Yugoslavia in foreign newspapers. The political trials reached their highpoint
with the “Dachau processes”,30 where during several processes, from among more than 30 exconcentration camp inmates, 15 were sentenced to death and 11 of those were executed. The
26
Elste, Koschat in Filipič, Nacistična Avstrija na zatožni klopi, Celovec-Ljubljana-Dunaj 2002, Mohorjeva
družba. AS 1931 –Republiški sekretariat za notranje zadeve SRS, fond Božični proces (šk. 554-564).
27
AS 1931 –Republiški sekretariat za notranje zadeve SRS, fond Božični proces (šk. 531-535).
28
Željeznikov, Dušan, Rupnikov proces, Cankarjeva založba, Ljubljana 1980. AS 1931 –Republiški sekretariat
za notranje zadeve SRS, fond Nagodetov proces (šk. 568-590)
29
AS 1931 –Republiški sekretariat za notranje zadeve SRS, fond Nagodetov proces (šk. 568-590)
30
Ivanič Martin (ur.), Dachauski procesi, Tozd Komunist, Ljubljana, 1990.
10
accused were convicted of cooperating with the Gestapo during the war and with Western
intelligence services after the war.
After the dispute with the Informbiro and the resulting abundance of “internal”
enemies, 16.288 persons (3,4% of those were Slovenians) were administratively convicted,
some of them were sent to labour camps (Naked Island, sv. Grgur). 31 Church represented the
backbone of the opposition and as communists did not yet entirely control the Church they
sought to make it subordinate. Only the area of the Diocese of Ljubljana for example, where
the repression against Church was most intense, 266 priests and monks were convicted in the
post-war period. 32
31
32
Režek, Neodvisnost sodstva na preizkušnji, str. 83.
Repe, Povojni sodni procesi, str. 59.
11
ARCHIVE SOURCES:
AS 1931 –Republiški sekretaria za notranje zadeve SRS, fond Božični proces (šk. 554-564).
AS 1931 –Republiški sekretaria za notranje zadeve SRS, fond Božični proces (šk. 531-535).
AS 1931 –Republiški sekretaria za notranje zadeve SRS, fond Nagodetov proces (šk. 568590)
AS 1931 –Republiški sekretariat za notranje zadeve SRS, fond Nagodetov proces (šk. 568590)
ARTICLES AND LITERATURE:
Louis Althusser, Izbrani spisi, Založba cf., Ljubljana, 2000
Tadeja Tominšek Čehulič, Partizansko sodstvo v Sloveniji med drugo svetovno vojno:
kaznovalna politika in vprašanje smrtnih kazni, str.83-95. V:Prispevki za novejšo zgodovino,
letnik XLVIX, št. 2, 2009, str. 83-94
Zdenko Čepič,, Ključne značilnosti slovenske politike v letih 1929-1955, Znanstveno poročilo,
Inštitut za novejšo zgodovino, Ljubljana, 1995
Mateja Čoh, V imenu slovenskega naroda: krivi!, diplomsko delo, Maribor, 1998
Alfred Elste, Michael Koschat in Hanzi Filipič, Nacistična Avstrija na zatožni klopi,
Mohorjeva družba, Celovec-Ljubljana-Dunaj, 2002
Bojan Godeša, Boris Mlakar, Mojca Šorn, Tadeja Tominšek Rihtar: Žrtve druge svetovne
vojne v Sloveniji. V: Prispevki za novejšo zgodovino, 30, 2002, št. 1, str. 121-130
Damijan Guštin, Razvoj vojaškega sodstva slovenskega odporniškega gibanja 1941-1945. V:
Prispevki za novejšo zgodovino, 2004, št. 1, str. 49-63
Martin Ivanič (ur.), Dachauski procesi, Tozd Komunist, Ljubljana, 1990
Jelka Melik, Razvoj kazenskega prava na slovenskem od 1848 do danes, str.192-195. V:
Malefične svoboščine Ljubljančanov, Gradivo in razprave 25, Ljubljana, Graz 2004, str. 185200
Milko Mikola, Sodišče slovenske narodne časti, Arhivi, 16, št. 1-2, str. 15-16.
Boris Mlakar, Epuracija in povojne žrtve v Zahodni Evropi. V: Prispevki za novejšo
zgodovino, 36, 1996, 1–2, str. 201-215
Božo Repe, Povojni sodni procesi. V: Zbornik referatov in razprave s simpozija Povojna
zgodovina na Slovenskem, Koroški pokrajinski muzej, Slovenj Gradec 1992, str. 54-63
12
Božo Repe, Politična represija v socialistični Sloveniji. V: Prispevki za novejšo zgodovino,
Letnik XLIV, št.1, Ljubljana 2004, str. 83-94
Mateja Režek, Neodvisnost sodstva na preizkušnji, Pravosodje in sistem politične kazenske
represije v Jugoslaviji (1948-1959). V: Zgodovina za vse, 9, št.1, 2002, str. 81-92
Jera Vodušek Starič, Ozadje sodnih procesov v Sloveniji v prvem povojnem letu. V: Prispevki
za novejšo zgodovino, 32, 1992, str. 139-154
Jera Vodušek Starič, Prevzem oblasti 1944-1946, Cankarjeva založba, Ljubljana, 1992
Lovro Šturm (ur.), Brezpravje, Slovensko pravosodje po letu 1945, Nova Revija, Ljubljana,
1998
13