Enter Ghost: Haunted Courts and Haunting Judgments in Transitional Justice

Abstract

How can we account for trials in which the judgment speaks not only to and about the defendants and their deeds, but also about injustices from a more distant past? Building on approaches to ghosts and haunting by Jacques Derrida and Avery Gordon, I propose to examine a set of the German post-1990 trials for human rights violations committed in the former East Germany as instances of haunted justice. Here, the courts not only adjudicated the present cases, but also tried to ‘go back and make whole what has been smashed’ (Benjamin 1969) by their own lack of judgment in the failed trials of the Nazi perpetrators. In this instance, the ‘time is out of joint’, and we see the ghosts of the failed trials of Nazi perpetrators standing next to the inheritance of impunity fostered in West German courts, and next to the now present East German perpetrators. What can justice mean in such a complex constellation of injustices? I argue that the ghostly dimension of these cases point to a need for a kind of justice and engagement that can ultimately not be found in courts—yet the courts’ engagement with this ghostly matter is nevertheless important.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Notes

  1. 1.

    Rechtsbeugung, a crime according to the German criminal code, literally means ‘bending the law’. Since there is no good translation of this concept, I use the more literal ‘bending the law’ and the more conceptual term ‘miscarriage of justice’ interchangeably.

  2. 2.

    German criminal cases are not commonly named after the defendant. For ease of identification and reference, I follow the common-law way of identifying legal cases by the defendants’ last names if the defendants’ names are publicly available.

  3. 3.

    Erklärung der Verteidigung im Verfahren gegen Hauke u.a. (12 July 1995). Robert Havemann Archiv Berlin, RH 327.

  4. 4.

    I owe this formulation to Lindy Ledohowski.

References

  1. Adorno, Theodor. 2003 [1959]. Was bedeutet: Aufarbeitung der Vergangenheit? In Eingriffe: Neun kritische Modelle. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.

  2. Alexy, Robert. 1993. Mauerschützen: Zum Verhältnis von Recht, Moral und Strafbarkeit. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Arendt, Hannah. 2003. Personal responsibility under dictatorship. In Responsibility and judgment, ed. Jerome Kohn, 17–49. New York: Schocken.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Benjamin, Walter. 1969. Theses on the philosophy of history. In Illuminations (trans: Zohn, H.)., 253–264. New York: Schocken.

  5. Borneman, John. 1997. Settling accounts: Violence, justice, and accountability in postsocialist Europe. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Cooke, Paul. 2005. Representing East Germany since unification: From colonization to nostalgia. Oxford and New York: Berg.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Derrida, Jacques. 1994. Specters of Marx: The state of the debt, the work of mourning and the New International. New York and London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Freudiger, Kerstin. 2002. Die juristische Aufarbeitung von NS-Verbrechen. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Gordon, Avery. 1997. Ghostly matters: Haunting and the sociological imagination. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Jarausch, Konrad H, and Michael Geyer. 2003. Shattered past: Reconstructing German histories. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Kinkel, Klaus. 1992. Begrüßungsansprache vor dem 15. Deutschen Richtertag am 23. September 1991 in Köln. Deutsche Richterzeitung 5.

  12. Marxen, Klaus, and Gerhard Werle. 1999. Die strafrechtliche Aufarbeitung von DDR-Unrecht: Eine Bilanz. Berlin and New York: Walter de Gruyter.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Mbembe, Achille. 2003. Necropolitics (trans: Meintjes, L.). Public Culture 15:11–40.

    Google Scholar 

  14. McAdams, James. 2001. Judging the past in unified Germany. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Müller, Ingo. 1992. Furchtbare Juristen: Die unbewältigte Vergangenheit unserer Justiz. München: Knaur.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Quasten, Dirk. 2003. Die Judikatur des Bundesgerichtshofs zur Rechtsbeugung im NS-Staat und in der DDR. Berlin: Duncker & Humblot.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Quint, Peter. 1999. Judging the past: The prosecution of East German border guards and the GDR chain of command. The Review of Politics 61: 303–329.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Schaap, Andrew. 2004. Political reconciliation through a struggle for recognition? Social & Legal Studies 13(4): 523–540.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Shakespeare, William. 2001. Hamlet: The tragical history of Hamlet Prince of Denmark, ed. A.R. Braunmuller. New York: Penguin Books.

  20. Till, Karen. 2005. The New Berlin: Memory, politics, place. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Villa-Vicencio, Charles, and William Verwoerd (eds.). 2000. Looking back, reaching forward: Reflections on the truth and reconciliation commission of South Africa. Cape Town: University of Cape Town Press.

    Google Scholar 

  22. von Miquel, Marc. 2004. Ahnden oder Amnestieren? Westdeutsche Justiz und Vergangenheitspolitik in den sechziger Jahren. Göttingen: Wallstein.

    Google Scholar 

Media Sources

  1. [no author] 1994. DDR-Juristen können verurteilt warden. Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung (10 May 1994).

  2. Albrecht, Julia. 1995. BGH: DDR-Richter nach Gesetzen beurteilen. taz, die tageszeitung (16 September 1995).

  3. Averesch, Sigrid. 1994. DDR-Jurist erhielt bislang höchste Strafe. Berliner Zeitung (June 18, 1994).

  4. Dümde, Claus. 1995. Anklagen wie vom Fließband. Neues Deutschland (17 July 1995).

  5. Fromme, Friedrich Karl. 1996. Richter bleibt Richter. Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung (7 February 1996).

  6. Kerscher, Helmut. 1993. Richterrobe schützt vor Strafe nicht (mehr). Sueddeutsche Zeitung (2 September 1993): 4.

  7. Lamprecht, Rolf. 1994. Freispruch für Rechtsblinde. Der Spiegel, No. 4.

  8. Lamprecht, Rolf. 1995. Ungleiches Recht. Der Spiegel, No. 14.

  9. Semler, Christian. 1996. Aufhebung des Todesurteils gegen Dietrich Bonhoeffer? taz, die tageszeitung (18 July 1996).

  10. Sueddeutsche Zeitung [no author]. 1995. Gebeugtes Recht. Sueddeutsche Zeitung (17 November 1995) [editorial].

  11. Werkentin, Falco. 1995. 68er im Dienste der Diktatoren. taz, die tageszeitung (20 October 1995).

  12. Werkentin, Falco. 1998. Last der Geschichte: Im Fall Havemann holt den BGH seine eigene Vergangenheit ein. taz, die tageszeitung (12 December 1998).

  13. Winters, Peter Jochen. 1994. Zur Schonung der DDR-Richter? Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung (3 August 1994).

Legal and Archival Documents

  1. BGH. 1952a. Entscheidungen des Bundesgerichtshofs in Strafsachen 2: 234–242.

  2. BGH. 1952b. Entscheidungen des Bundesgerichtshofs in Strafsachen 3: 110–129.

  3. BGH. 1956. Entscheidungen des Bundesgerichtshofs in Strafsachen 10: 294–304.

  4. BGH. 1968. Neue Juristische Wochenschrift [NJW]: 1339–1340.

  5. BGH. 1993. Entscheidungen des Bundesgerichtshofs in Strafsachen 40: 30–44.

    Google Scholar 

  6. BGH. 1994a. Entscheidungen des Bundesgerichtshofs in Strafsachen 40: 169–188.

  7. BGH. 1994b. Entscheidungen des Bundesgerichtshofs in Strafsachen 40: 272–286.

  8. BGH. 1995a. Entscheidungen des Bundesgerichtshofs in Strafsachen 41: 157–175.

  9. BGH. 1995b. Entscheidungen des Bundesgerichtshofs in Strafsachen 41: 247–277.

  10. BGH. 1995c. Entscheidungen des Bundesgerichtshofs in Strafsachen 41: 317–347.

  11. BGH. 1996 [1956]. Neue Strafrechtszeitung [NStZ] No. 10: 485–489.

  12. BGH. 1998. Entscheidungen des Bundesgerichtshofs in Strafsachen 44: 275–308.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Redaktion ‚Neue Justiz’ (ed.). 2001. Der Politbüro-Prozess: Eine Dokumentation. Baden-Baden: Nomos.

  14. Rottleuthner, Hubert (ed.) 1999, Das Havemann-Verfahren. Baden-Baden: Nomos.

  15. U.S. v. Altstoetter et al. 1951. Trials of War Criminals Before the Nuremberg Military Tribunals under Control Council Law No. 10, Vol. 3. Washington: United States Government Printing Office.

Download references

Acknowledgments

I want to thank Doris Buss, Lindy Ledohowski, and Lena Foljanty, inspiring fellow travellers in exploring the ghostly dimension, as well as Rosemary Nagy, Melissa Williams and Erica Frederiksen and the listeners and commentators on ‘ghost stories’ presented at the conference of the Canadian Initiative in Law, Culture and Humanities in October 2007, the Political Theory Colloquium at the University of Greifswald, Germany, and the Conference Keine Zeit zu trauern? Die Justiz nach 1945: Was war der Preis für ihr nahtloses Weiterfunktionieren? at the Justizakademie des Landes Nordrhein-Westfalen.

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Christiane Wilke.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Wilke, C. Enter Ghost: Haunted Courts and Haunting Judgments in Transitional Justice. Law Critique 21, 73–92 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10978-009-9065-y

Download citation

Keywords

  • Haunting
  • Germany
  • Ghosts
  • Time
  • Transitional justice
  • Trials