This article is written by Shourya Singh during his internship by Le Droit India.
INTRODUCTION
The legal system of Nazi Germany between 1933 and 1945 consisted of a combination of formal court structure and ideological use. Instead of dismantling courts or dismantling the structure as such, the Nazi administration restructured the judiciary to be an institutionally tiered system with both conventional civil and criminal justice and applying National Socialist policy. By structural reforms, dual legal systems, and the incorporation of Party ideology into judicial training as well as jurisprudence, Nazi Germany established a highly developed system in which using courts as government tools was utilized.
ORDINARY COURTS (ORDENTLICHE GERICHTSBARKEIT)
The basis of the Nazi court system was the regular civil and criminal courts. These courts retained much from the Weimar era and still handled everyday legal matters, e.g., family conflicts, property conflicts, and pure criminal law.
The hierarchy included:
Amtsgerichte (Local Courts)
Landgerichte (Regional Courts)
Oberlandesgerichte (Higher Regional Courts)
Reichsgericht (Reich Supreme Court)
Even though the structure continued, ideological control was continued by the Nazis through politically dependable judges being appointed. Judicial impartiality came to an end. Even civilian case rulings were sometimes handed down depending on whether the parties had similar values as the Nazi regime.
SPECIAL COURTS (SONDERGERICHTEN)
Special Courts were created to try political offenses and quickly impose punishment for conduct deemed threatening to the regime. There were no standard procedural safeguards in the courts. Defendants were given no substantial opportunity to defend themselves, and appeals were prohibited. The main role of these courts was to intimidate and silence opposition or dissent from Nazi norms.
PEOPLE’S COURT (VOLKSGERICHTSHOF)
The People’s Court of 1934 dealt with so-called state crimes, such as treason, opposition, and criticism of the Führer. It was led by judges like Roland Freisler and was notorious for its show-trials and merciless sentencing. Trials were brief and had pre-judged verdicts—lengthy prison sentences or execution. This court represented the perfect merging of ideology within the legal apparatus.
PARTY COURTS (EHRENSENATE UND PARTEIGERICHTE)
The Nazi Party also had internal Party Courts to punish its members. They maintained ideological purity within the Party and punished disloyal or dishonourable acts. Their powers were independent of those of the state but were meant to complement the overall legal-political apparatus of totalitarian rule.
MILITARY COURTS AND SS COURTS
During wartime, military tribunals dealt with crimes like disobedience or desertion by soldiers. The SS had courts as well to decide upon the conduct of its members, to keep discipline and ideological competence within intact. They operated outside the civilian authorities and were famous for protecting the SS members from punishment for crimes against civilians or prisoners.
SUPREME LEGAL LEADERSHIP
There were two individuals who served as Reich Minister of Justice during the Nazi period:
Franz Gürtner (1932–1941)
Who initially struggled to balance Nazi pressure and some continuity of law but eventually came under Party pressure.
Otto Thierack (1942–1945)
Who modernized the judiciary into a form fully subservient to Nazi policy Thierack implemented speeded sentencing, cooperated with the SS in having prisoners handed over from judicial to extrajudicial detention, and assisted the legal management of the Final Solution.
Throughout their period of office, the judiciary lost its independence and became an instrument of the state.
DUALISM AND PROTECTIVE CUSTODY
Even the courts remained in the shadow of the SS and Gestapo. The regime had created a twin system whereby defendants acquitted by court could be rearrested and dispatched to concentration camps without trial. The extrajudicial process—protective custody—effectively reduced the legal process to a sham in the majority of instances. The law provided no actual protection, merely the illusion of process.
SLAVE LABOUR, RACIAL DISCRIMINATION, AND JUDICIAL LEGITIMATION
The legal system in the Nazi regime legitimized mass discrimination and exploitation. Jews, the Roma, the Slavs, and political dissidents were denied civil rights by law. The Nuremberg Laws established a racially organized society in which citizenship and rights were matters of racial origin. Interracial marriage was banned, and Jewish-origin individuals were institutionally excluded from their role in public life.
The judiciary legitimized forced labour by sentencing prisoners—especially from occupied territories and concentration camps—to work under inhumane conditions. Legal documents formalized what was essentially economic exploitation and state-sponsored slavery.
In addition, “asocial” legislation against homeless people, the disabled, and homosexuals allowed the state to imprison and persecute them in the guise of legality. The courts did not simply implement these laws—they implemented them in abundance, punishing behaviour short only by a little of the ideological target.
WARTIME EXPANSION AND BRUTALISATION OF LAW
During the outbreak of World War II, the legal system was savage. Special legislation and decrees were made in order to punish looting, defeatism, or sabotage through speedy executions. Martial law was established in occupied areas by German tribunals, mass sentencing was imposed, and population control became possible through deportations and asset seizure.
The courts grew more and more reflectors of the Nazi state’s militarized, radicalized ambitions. Prosecutors and judges were directed openly to use the most severe treatment against Jews, Poles, and Soviet POWs. Judicial review was de facto eliminated as the regime demanded brutality and obedience above all else.
IDEOLOGY AND LAW: A DANGEROUS UNION
Nazi jurisprudence shows the peril of combining ideology and law. The instant that the judiciary lost its image as a check on power and started to work more to support ideology, it cut itself loose from justice completely. Laws meant to safeguard citizens were reinterpreted for their persecution. Courts meant to provide justice were turned into political arenas. Judges schooled to uphold impartiality were employed as tools of persecution.
Legal theorists and historians agree that the Nazi experience proves the law needs to remain ideologically neutral. A court of law has to interpret laws in light of standards of justice, equality, and dignity of man—not racial, political, or religious ideology. When the law is used as an instrument of ideology, it no longer upholds justice but is an instrument of oppression.
CONCLUSION
The Nazi law system deployed the judiciary in the service of ideological purity, racial superiority, and political compliance. In a pervasive system of courts, laws, and institutions of law, the Nazis remade justice as a tool of repression. Legal institutions created the appearance of order and hid the brutality of the regime. Law and ideology became intertwined to create mass imprisonment, legalized discrimination, and active involvement in genocide.
By looking at the way Nazi Germany used the legal system to carry out its darkest deeds, we are reminded of the essential role an independent and impartial judiciary plays in any democratic society. The law must be a shield, and never a sword. When ideology replaces justice, what you end up with is not order—but tyranny.
REFERENCES
Stolleis, M., 1998. The Law under the Swastika: Studies on Legal History in Nazi Germany. University of Chicago Press. [https://press.uchicago.edu/ucp/books/book/chicago/L/bo3728270.html]
Mason, J.B., 1944. The Judicial System of the Nazi Party. American Political Science Review, 38(1), pp.96–103. [https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/american-political-science-review/article/abs/judicial-system-of-the-nazi-party/BE2F28B5A68D98A13A929F07992B9D79]
Antonov, B.A., 2019. The legal system of Germany in 1933–1945: mentality in the categories of a concrete order. ВЕСТНИК РГГУ, p.129. [https://vestnik.rsuh.ru/magazines/2019-3/2727/]
