free forum make a forum for free message boards free forum hosting free phpbb forum phpbb create free forum

yamsham · Joined: 31 Mar 2011 Posts: 26

Wat set the judiciary apart from the rest of weinmar institutions? what did tucholsky's statement on page 113 "when the republic was created these same judges held over from the monarchy..." mean for justice in the republic?

yamsham · Joined: 31 Mar 2011 Posts: 26

wellllll...... the juduciary definately was the most independant and in controll (having most power) of all the sections of the government. definately shown in the fact that they could get away with so much injustice and stuff. and every one had to answer to them in the end so it was interesting that these poisitions weren't the type t have elections or a change in judicial seat after so many years. and the fact that the same judges were form the monarchy brings an extra interesting mix into the situation. in one circumstance they could have been the type to hold onto laws from the monarchy and get away with it because they had so much power. but instead they had their own agenda to take care of so they would use their new power to do exctly what they had always wanted to do in their positions but couldn't because the monarchy was still in power and was in charge of them. but now they can do what they want becasuse of the new constitution. they took care of the people they liked and punished the ones they didn't like so much more harshly. because of all of this justice was not really justice as it should be. because as we know justice is supppsed to be blind. i mean it still isn't but at least it isn't as bad today as it was in weinmar.

edangelo · Joined: 15 Nov 2010 Posts: 41

What set the judiciary apart from other Weimar institutions firstly was its power in society. Justice and the law are really at the core of any country. The court system is really what keeps chaos from arising, and what keeps people safe and keeps a community functioning. I don’t think there was any other system that was such a foundation to the country. In addition what set it apart was the elitist and exclusive nature of the judges at the time; “Judges came from middle and upper middle class backgrounds and enjoyed the prestige of inclusion in the small stratum of university trained professionals in the society” (p112). They were all trained separately from other people in law, giving them all the same perspective. There were a generally homogenous mix when it came to background and political views. Judges also had a stronger power in court than in different countries, and were weighed much more heavily over the jury.

Tucholsky’s statement really illustrated the danger of a corrupt legal system. Like I said before, law is arguably the most crucial component of a working society. The court worker’s responsibility is too enforce policies and values already set, not to use their power to exercise their own political agendas, or enforce their personal views and values. In this quote he explains the danger of “private law”, where judges are no longer working for the public but are working for themselves or for a group they may be a part of. If judges aren’t working for the good of society than that is a huge problem. If the system of justice is not just, it’s nearly impossible for a country to be a safe and stable.

oliviabecker · Joined: 03 Jan 2011 Posts: 23

I think Emily put it really well by saying that a fair and equal system of law is at the core of any country. In Germany during this time, the legal system was suffice to say, far from fair and equal. It was unique from other governmental institutions because the way the structure of the court was set up (no jury, only one judge), how the judges tended to come out of schooling a homogeneous and nationalistic group, and how they rejected the Weimar Republic as a whole. If you have a system of the government as important as the judicial one, who dislikes the current government they are a part of, there is bound to be problems. This explains why the judges sympathized with the right-wing Femme groups and tended to hand out lenient sentences to them, while not administering justice to the public. As Tucholsky says on page 113, a new wave of judges didn’t come in as soon as the government switched to the Weimar Republic. These judges were accustomed to the old system of governance and did not pledge allegiance to the new one. As Tucholsky says, “They created a private law and subverted the public law of the Republic by refusing to administer justice in an equal manner to all people.”

I can’t think of a better example of true corruption, coming from the federal level. Its bad enough that terrorist groups are killing off political figures and civilians, but then the institution that is supposed to be delivering justice is sympathizing with them. I think this is probably hard for anyone to comprehend that hasn’t lived in a corrupt, police state and foreshadowing for what is to come later.

Kdaum2011 · Joined: 15 Nov 2010 Posts: 19

considering as much as what can be said on the subject has been said, the implications of a biased and retroactive judiciary branch etc, I'd like to address the idea of the judges that sought to preserve the status quo. This quote on page 112 "Therefore, the judges represented a bulwark that worked to protect the status quo in Wilhelmine Germany". Implies an inherent inability to move on post war. If the judges carried their ideals over from the previous government, had the weimar republic ever actually been ready to move on? Given our past readings and discussions it's clear the republic was doomed from the start and inapplicable to the German people.

Kcameronburr · Joined: 15 Nov 2010 Posts: 17

I think what sums up the sentiments of the judicial system in the Wiemar republic was expressed on page 113, "They entered into opposition and began to serve their own independent ideas of what they desired the state to be." that meant that the judicary system was not serving the people of Weimar, or the state. They were instead, serving thier own narrow, class oriented interests allowing justice to fall by the wayside. However, I doubt that they thought about it that way. I'm guessing that they felt they were acting in the interest of justice, they felt that the the status quo should not have changed, that conservative nationalism was the just route and the best route for Germany. I dont see them as a bunch of crusty old aristocratic bastards that all got together and were like ok, lets fuck with the republic and the leftist he he, yeah that'll be fun. So while justice did fall by the way side, I think its important to note that they didn't feel that way.

mreilly · Joined: 31 Mar 2011 Posts: 14

I think one of the main things that set the judiciary apart from other Weimar institutions was that the other institutions attempted to work in the best interest of the people while the judges worked primarily for themselves and stuck to their political opinions rather than the law. The judges had an immense amount of power since their was no jury and defendants most often only faced one judge. "Judges dominated the legal system" (p.112) They should have known better than to make their own agendas rise above the law. The judges were some of the most well educated people who should have used their brains and logic in the the court. "Candidates for the judiciary were among the one percent of the population who received three years of university training."(p.111) I feel that the judges would have served Weimar better if they had been non biased and had not been so down on the Republic. "Both groups rejected the Republic and had their own concepts of an idealized state to which they desired. "(p.111)
When Tucholsky stated that " in a sense the judiciary confused itself with the state and served its own interest instead of the whole society," he is implying that there was no true justice when it came to the Weimar judges because for their to be justice you have to be working towards the greater good and for others and not for your own selfish agenda.

ssteck2011 · Joined: 31 Mar 2011 Posts: 4

As many people have said, the largest factor that set the Judiciary apart from the rest of the Weimar Institutions was it’s power. The Judges were taken out of the normal track in education and separated from all other people studying law. They were held higher than other people in society, they were raised to think that they were superior. I think in many ways the biggest issue with the Judiciary was just that, the Judges were the most elite in society. The Judges social stance not only made them more inclined to certain political perspective but enabled them to act on those perspectives. They were too entitled and felt that they had the right to act on their political agendas.

Another major issue with the Judiciary was that it was designed pre WWI. When the Weimar Republic was established they chose not to change the system which I believe was a mistake. The Judges held far too much power for the newer system. The Weimar republic again ‘compromised’ and settled with what they viewed as a good enough Judiciary while a new design that was more catered to the Weimar Republic’s beliefs would have served better.

Tucholsky’s statement shows that the Judges had no intention of upholding the Republics values and ideas. They were working towards destroying the republic which they did not support. They made their rulings in favor of their own political agendas and threw the justice of the republic out of the window. The justice of the republic was not being respected or obeyed by the Judges who did not believe in it.

Free Forum