THE BERLIN WALL: A DEFIANCE OF HUMAN RIGHTS

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP78-03061A000100050019-7
• Release Decision: RIFPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 55
• Document Creation Date: November 17, 2016
• Document Release Date: August 11, 1998
• Sequence Number: 19
• Publication Date: January 1, 1962
• Content Type: OPEN

Approved For Release 2000/08/27 : CIA-RDP78-03061A000100050019-7
THE BERLIN WALL
A Defiance
of
Human Rights
INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION OF JURISTS
GENEVA
1962
Approved For Release 2000/08/27 : CIA-RDP78-03061A000100050019-7
 Approved For Relears aB6410/OSil2 ssiafdlA- 7Ps78-03061AODMO0 #~9alon
which has Consultative Status, Category if B ", with the United Nations
Economic and Social Council. The Commission seeks to foster understanding
of and respect for the Rule of Law. The Members of the Commission are :
JOSEPH T. THORSON
(Honorary President)
VIVIAN BOSE
(President)
PER T. FEDERSPIEL
(Vice-President)
JOSE T. NABUCO
(Vice-President)
SIR ADETOKUNBO A. ADEMOLA
ARTURO A. ALAFRIZ
PHILIPPE N. BOULOS
J. J. CARBAJAL VICTORICA
U CHAN HTOON
ELI WHITNEY DEBEVOISE
SIR OWEN DIXON
MANUEL G. ESCOBEDO
OSVALDO ILLANES BENITEZ
JEAN KREHER
AXEL HENRIK MUNKTELL
LORD SHAWCROSS
SEBASTIAN SOLER
President of the Exchequer Court of Canada
Former Judge of the Supreme Court of India
President of the Consultative Assembly of the
Council of Europe; Member of the Danish Par-
liament; Barrister-at-Law, Copenhagen
Member of the Bar of Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
Chief Justice of Nigeria
President of the Federation of Bar Associations
of the Philippines
Member of the Italian Parliament; Professor of
Law at the University of Padua
United States District Judge for the Southern
District of New York; Immediate Past Presi-
dent of the Association of the Bar of the City
of New York. USA.
Deputy Prime Minister, Government of Lebanon;
former Governor of Beirut; former Minister of
Justice
Attorney-at-Law; Professor of Public Law at the
University of Montevideo, Uruguay; former
Minister
Judge of the Supreme Court of the Union of
Burma
Attorney-at-Law at the Supreme Court of the
Netherlands
Attorney-at-Law, New York, USA
Chief Justice of Australia
Professor of Law, University of Mexico; Attorney-
at-Law; former President of the Barra Mexicana
Judge of the Supreme Court of Ceylon; former
Attorney-General and former Solicitor-General
of Ceylon
First President of the Supreme Court of the
Republic of Senegal
Attorney-at-Law; President of the Bar Association
of Costa Rica; Professor of Law ; former
Ambassador to the United States and to the
Organization of American States
Judge of the Supreme Court of Chile
Advocate at the Court of Appeal, Paris, France
Member of the Swedish Parliament; Professor of
Law at the University of Uppsala
Secretary-General of the International Commission
of Jurists; former President of the General
Assembly of the United Nations; former
Ambassador of New Zealand to the United
Nations and United States
Professor of Law at the University of Ghent,
Belgium; former Minister; former Senator
Former Minister of Czechoslovakia to Great
Britain and France; former Member of the
Czechoslovak Government
Former Attorney-General of England
Attorney-at-Law; Professor of Law; former
Attorney-General of Argentina
Senior Advocate of the Supreme Court of India;
Secretary, Indian Bar Association; sometime
Secretary to Mahatma Gandhi
Barrister-at-Law, Karachi, Pakistan; former Judge
of the Chief Court of the Sind
Secretary-General: SIR LESLIE'MUNRO, K.C.M.G., K.C.V.O.
Former President of the General Assembly of the United Nations
Administrative Secretary: EDWARD S. KOZERA,
Former Lecturer in Government, Columbia University
Approved For Release 2000/08/27 : CIA-RDP78-03061A000100050019-7
INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION OF JURISTS, 6, RUE DU MONT-DE-SIGN, GENEVA, SWITZERLAND
 Approved For Release 2000/08/27 : CIA-RDP78-03061A000100050019-7
THE BERLIN WALL
A Defiance
of
Human Rights
INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION OF JURISTS
GENEVA
1962
Approved For Release 2000/08/27 : CIA-RDP78-03061A000100050019-7
 Approved For Release 2000/08/27 : CIA-RDP78-03061A000100050019-7
FOREWORD . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
MAPS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
CHRONOLOGY OF EVENTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
1. VOTING WITH THE FEET . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
11. MEASURES TO PREVENT FLEEING THE REPUBLIC . . . . 14
III. THE CONSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENT OF GREATER BERLIN 20
IV. THE SEALING OFF OF EAST BERLIN . . . . . . . . . 28
CONCLUSION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44
Appendices
A. Announcement by the Municipal Council of East
Berlin, dated August 12, 1961 . . . . . . . . . . . 47
B. Announcement by the Municipal Council of East
Berlin, dated August 19, 1961 . . . . . . . . . . . 48
C. Ordinance concerning Restriction of Residence . . . 49
D. Order of Pritzwalk Municipal Council . . . . . . . 51
E. Excerpts from the press of the German
Democratic Republic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52
Approved For Release 2000/08/27 : CIA-RDP78-03061A000100050019-7
 Approved For Release 2000/08/27 : CIA-RDP78-03061A000100050019-7
The great walls of the past were erected to repel invaders and
barbarians. The Wall in Berlin is unique because its object is to
prevent the men and women behind it from reaching freedom.
The International Commission of Jurists does not propose to
investigate and pass judgment on the complex political issues that
have kept the problem of Berlin at the centre of international
attention. As a non-political organization, the Commission is
dedicated to the support and advancement of those principles
of justice which constitute the basis of the Rule of Law. Respect
for fundamental human rights is one such principle. The Report
submitted herewith is therefore concerned with the human rights
aspect of the Berlin problem and mentions political events merely
to provide historical background.
The material on which this Report is based has been gathered from
many sources published in the German Democratic Republic: from
its legislation, from its court decisions, from the pronouncements
of its leaders and from the comments of its newspapers. The plight
of the population of East Berlin is here reflected with the same
intensity as would have been found if evidence had been taken
from the thousands of refugees. Not always has it been reasoned
political judgment that drove them away, nor were they in the
majority moved solely by economic considerations. But the one
feeling they had in common was the apprehension of being unable
to determine freely the course of their lives and of those of their
children, of being brutally separated from their families, of being
gradually deprived of their German and European cultural heritage.
An intimidated and fearful community has now been hermetically
sealed from its contacts with the outside world and from its last
chance of reaching freedom. The violation of human rights that
has thus been committed is here brought to the attention of the
world legal community.
March 1962 SIR LESLIE MUNRO
Secretary-General
5
Approved For Release 2000/08/27 : CIA-RDP78-03061A000100050019-7
 Approved For Release 2000/08/27 : CIA-RDP78-03061A000100050019-7
= territory forming the
Federal Republic of
Germany in 1961.
territory forming the
German Democratic
Republic in 1961.
6
Approved For Release 2000/08/27 : CIA-RDP78-03061A000100050019-7
 Approved For Release 2000/08/27 : CIA-RDP78-03061A000100050019-7
October 1943: Conference of the Foreign Ministers of the
United States of America, the United King-
dom and the Union of Soviet Socialist
Republics in Moscow at which agreement in
principle is reached on joint responsibility for
post-war Germany and on the joint occupation
of Germany.
September 12,1944: Protocol between the Governments of the
U.S.A., the U.K. and the U.S.S.R. on the
Zones of occupation in Germany and the
administration of " Greater Berlin ".
November 14: Agreement between the Governments of the
U.S.A., the U.K. and the U.S.S.R. on the
control machinery in Germany.
February 1945: At the Yalta Conference, the Heads of
Government of the U.S.A., U.K. and U.S.S.R.
confirm the Agreement of November 14, 1944.
They also agree that France is to receive an
occupation Zone in Germany and that the
French are to participate in the Allied Control
Council.
May 1: Agreement between the Governments of the
U.S.A., U.K., U.S.S.R. and the Provisional
Government of the French Republic regard-
ing amendments to the Agreement of Novem-
ber 14, 1944, on control machinery in Ger-
many, by. which a fourth occupation Zone and
a fourth Sector in Greater Berlin are created.
May 8: German Act of Surrender.
June 5: Statement by the Governments of the U.S.A.,
U.K., U.S.S.R. and the Provisional Govern-
ment of the French Republic on Zones of
occupation in Germany.
Approved For Release 2000/08/27 : CIA-RDP78-03061A000100050019-7
 Approved For Release 2000/08/27 : CIA-RDP78-03061A000100050019-7
June 5, 1945: Statement by the Governments of the U.S.A.,
U.K., U.S.S.R. and the Provisional Govern-
ment of the French Republic on control
machinery in Germany.
July 7: Constitution of the Inter-Allied Governing
Authority for Greater Berlin, known as the
Kommandatura.
July 26: Agreement between the Governments of the
U.S.A., U.K., U.S.S.R. and the Provisional
Government of the French Republic regard-
ing Amendments to the Protocol of Septem-
ber 12, 1944.
August 2: Potsdam Conference between the Heads of
Government of the U.S.A., U.K. and U.S.S.R.
ends.
April 21, 1946: The Communist Party becomes the SED by
absorbing the members of the Social Demo-
cratic Party living in East Berlin.
August 13: The Inter-Allied Governing Authority, the
Kommandatura, proclaims the Temporary
Constitution of Greater Berlin.
October 20: Free Elections for the Berlin Municipal
Assembly.
June 24, 1947: Election of Ernst Reuter as Mayor of
Greater Berlin. This election is vetoed by
the Soviet Commandant.
March 20, 1948: The Soviet delegation withdraws from the
Allied Control Council.
June 16: The Soviet Commandant withdraws from the
Kommandatura.
June 24: After having imposed heavy restrictions on
civil traffic of persons and goods into West
Berlin, the U.S.S.R. completes the total
blockade of West Berlin. The " Airlift "
begins shortly afterwards.
July 1: In the absence of the Soviet Commandant the
Western Powers suspend the activities of the
Kommandatura.
8
Approved For Release 2000/08/27 : CIA-RDP78-03061A000100050019-7
 Approved For Release 2000/08/27 : CIA-RDP78-03061A000100050019-7
September 6, 1948: A Communist mob in the City Hall, located
in the Soviet Sector, prevents a session of the
Municipal Assembly. The Assembly conse-
quently holds its first session in the British
Sector.
November 30: The SED faction of the Municipal Assembly
calls a meeting of the " Democratic Bloc " and
" representatives of the mass organizations "
to elect a Municipal Council for East Berlin.
December 21: The Kommandatura resumes work without
the Soviet Commandant.
May 4, 1949: The New York Four Power Agreement be-
tween the Governments of France, U.S.S.R.,
U.K. and U.S.A. on the Lifting of the Berlin
Blockade. " ... All the restrictions imposed
since March 1, 1948, by the Government of
the U.S.S.R. on communications, transporta-
tion and trade between Berlin and the Western
Zones of Germany ... will be removed on
May 12, 1949, ... "
May 23: Promulgation of the Basic Law (i.e. the Cons-
titution) of the Federal Republic of Germany.
June 20: The Final Communique of the Sixth Session
of the Council of Foreign Ministers at Paris
confirms, inter alia, the Agreement on the
Lifting of the Blockade.
June 8, 1950: Main Statute is promulgated for the adminis-
tration of East Berlin.
August 3: Promulgation of the Constitution of the
German Democratic Republic.
October 1: Constitution of West Berlin comes into effect.
January 4, 1952: Third Transitional Law of the Federal Re-
public of Germany is passed. This law
equates West Berlin with the Federal States
of the Federal Republic of Germany in
matters of law, finance and economics.
January 19, 1953: Ordinance of East Berlin assimilates the ad-
ministration of East Berlin with that of the
GDR.
Approved For Release 2000/08/27 : CIA-RDP78-03061A000100050019-7
 Approved For Release 2000/08/27 : CIA-RDP78-03061A000100050019-7
October 29, 1953: Ordinance on the issue of identity cards in
the GDR which comes into operation for
East Berlin on November 11, 1953.
September 19,1954: Passport Act (GDR) makes a passport and
visa obligatory for every international fron-
tier crossing.
August 30, 1956: Passport (Amendment) Act (GDR) introduces
more severe penal provisions.
December 11, 1957: Passport (Amendment) Act (GDR) extends
the passport regulations to travel to West
Germany.
December 11: Criminal Law (Amendment) Act (GDR) in-
troduces, inter alia, a new punishable offence,
that of " suborning into leaving the GDR ".
August 4, 1961: East Berlin Municipal Council orders regis-
tration of all transfrontier workers.
August 11: Following the Resolution of the Warsaw Pact
States, instructions issues to the Council of
Ministers by People's Chamber of the GDR
concerning measures " for the security of the
GDR ".
August 12: Decree of the Council of Ministers and ins-
tructions by the Ministry, of the Interior on
the sealing off of East Berlin.
August 13: Construction of the Wall begins.
10
Approved For Release 2000/08/27 : CIA-RDP78-03061A000100050019-7
 Approved For Release 2000/08/27 : CIA-RDP78-03061A000100050019-7
By starting to build a Wall through Berlin on August 13,
1961, the Communist regime in the German Democratic Republic
(GDR) erected a monument commemorating and symbolizing
three things.
1. In the last 15 years millions of GDR citizens have escaped
from their imposed regime by fleeing to West Berlin and the
Federal Republic of Germany. Neither the rigid passport
requirements nor the penalties of 3 years imprisonment for " flee-
ing the Republic " and up to 15 years rigorous imprisonment for
" false proselytism " (suborning into leaving the GDR) succeeded
in stemming the flow. Even the setting up of a closed area along
the 859 miles of border between the GDR and the Federal
Republic was ineffective as long as the escape route via Berlin
remained open on account of the freedom of movement in the
Greater Berlin area. To close the " door to freedom " required
the erection of an unscalable Wall between Communist-ruled
East Berlin and free West Berlin. In building the Wall the GDR
regime has publicly given visible and tangible proof of its incapacity
to provide for its subjects that minimum degree of freedom,
justice and welfare which represents the difference between a
State and a concentration camp. First, therefore, an account
should be given of the phenomenon of the flight from the Republic
and of the relevant deterrent measures taken before August 13,
1961. Parts I and II of the following report deal with this aspect.
2. Even after the border between the GDR and the Federal
Republic had been sealed off, the escape route via Berlin remained
open to East Germans because the four big Powers had at the
close of World War Two agreed on a special status for Greater
Berlin. Under the various agreements pertaining to this status,
Greater Berlin was divided into four Sectors but was jointly
administered, i.e., it was treated as a whole administrative unit. In
1946 the Inter-Allied Authority responsible for the joint adminis-
tration of the city issued a " Temporary Constitution of Greater
Berlin ". On the basis of this Constitution a single Municipal
Assembly and a single Municipal Council for the whole area of
Approved For Release 2000/08/27 : CIA-RDP78-03061A000100050019-7
 Approved For Release 2000/08/27 : CIA-RDP78-03061A000100050019-7
Greater Berlin were established as the legislative and executive
organs, respectively. A mere two years later, however, the splitting-
up process was begun; it was initiated by the constitution of a
Municipal Council for the Soviet Sector. Such a constitution
was both illegal and incompatible with the Four Power agreements.
The split, which grew progressively wider from the constitutional
and administrative viewpoints, had no effect on the unrestrained
movement of West and East Berliners across the border between
the Soviet Sector on the one hand and the American, British and
French Sectors on the other. The freedom of movement in the
area of Greater Berlin, based on the Four Power agreements,
was preserved until August 13, 1961. The building of the Wall
begun on that day put an end to this freedom and thus symbolized
the collapse of the city's status as laid down by the Four Power
agreements. This development is dealt with in Part III of the
Report.
3. The final Part of the Report is devoted to the effect of
the events of August 13, 1961, on the walled-off inhabitants of
East Berlin. The evaluation of the legal position is based on
human rights which are guaranteed under the GDR Constitution;
the Wall also symbolizes the contempt in which these rights are
held.
Approved For Release 2000/08/27 : CIA-RDP78-03061A000100050019-7
 Approved For Release 2000/08/27 : CIA-RDP78-03061A000100050019-7
The stream of refugees which, from 1946, poured from the
Soviet-occupied Zone of Germany-since 1950 the German
Democratic Republic-into West Berlin and the Federal
Republic of Germany, was a phenomenon without parallel in
recent times. This flight from East to West represented a unique
form of plebiscite against the coercive rule of a Communist regime.
Up to August 13, 1961, when the sealing-off of East Berlin closed
the last escape route to the West, an estimated 3.7 to 4 million
inhabitants of the Soviet-occupied areas of Germany had fled to
the West. In the period of 1950-1959 alone the population of
these areas (GDR and East Berlin) dropped from 18.4 million
to 17.3 million. The Soviet-occupied areas of Germany are the
only territory in Europe, if not in the whole world, showing a
constant decrease in population.
The exact number of refugees from the Soviet Zone cannot
be determined with certainty, as registration was begun only in
September 1949. From September 1949 to August 15, 1961,
however, 2,691,270 refugees were registered. Statistics reveal that
the two sexes were represented in almost equal numbers, while
50 % of all refugees were young persons under the age of 25.
A breakdown by occupation shows that the number of gainfully
active persons maintained a constant level at 60.5 %; breaking
this down further, it will be found that workers and craftsmen
head the list, followed by persons engaged in commerce, transport
and agriculture, and finally by intellectuals. While the number of
refugees belonging to the liberal professions did not attain the
high figures for other occupational groups, a comparatively greater
importance was attached to it, since it meant that in many cases
the " old intelligentsia " all but vanished. From 1954 until
mid-1961 refugees from the GDR included:
3,371 doctors;
1,329 dentists;
291 veterinary surgeons;
960 pharmacists;
132 judges and State attorneys;
Approved For Release 2000/08/27 : CIA-RDP78-03061A000100050019-7
 Approved For Release 2000/08/27 : CIA-RDP78-03061A000100050019-7
679 lawyers and notaries;
752 university teachers;
16,724 teachers (general and technical schools);
17,082 engineers and technicians.
Both the extent of the refugee movement and its composition
by age group and occupation were harmful to the economy of the
Soviet-occupied areas of Germany, as well as sorely hurting the
prestige of the Communist regime in the GDR and East Berlin.
II. MEASURES TO PREVENT FLEEING THE
REPUBLIC
Passport Regulations and Offences
Government and Parliament in the GDR took administrative
and penal measures at an early stage, and subsequently made
them more severe, with the particular aim of counteracting the
escape movement and, in general, making travel from the GDR
to the Federal Republic and abroad more difficult.
The relevant GDR legislation made a passport and visa obli-
gatory for every border crossing (Passport Act of September 15,
1954, amended by the Act of August 30, 1956). Any person
leaving, or arriving in, the territory of the GDR without the
requisite permit or failing to observe the instructions regarding
destination, routes and duration of travel, or any person who
fraudulently obtained a travel permit, in favour of himself or
another person, by giving wrong information, was liable to be
sentenced to three years' imprisonment.
At first these regulations did not apply to internal German
traffic, i.e., journeys to the Federal Republic, but were extended
to such traffic by an amending Act of December 11, 1957. The
significant point here was that unauthorized travel to West Ger-
many could thereby be dealt with under the legislation on fleeing
the Republic. The crime of fleeing the Republic was committed
by any person leaving the territory of the GDR without the neces-
sary permit.
14
Approved For Release 2000/08/27 : CIA-RDP78-03061A000100050019-7
 Approved For Release 2000/08/27 : CIA-RDP78-03061A000100050019-7
In 1958, the first year in which the Passport (Amendment) Act
of 1957 was applied, there was a fall of 75 % in private travel
from the GDR to the Federal Republic.
Sentences for breaches of the Passport Act as amended have
been numerous. In the period January-October 1958 no less
than 110 prosecutions for crimes against the Act were brought
before just one of the eight Municipal District Courts in East
Berlin. By way of example, a very recent judgment may be
mentioned. On August 21, 1961, the Municipal Court of Greater
Berlin sentenced the accused K. and P. to 12 and 8 months im-
prisonment respectively for the mere attempt to flee the Re-
public.
In making its finding the Court said:
Under Section 5 of the Passport Act as amended by Section 1 of the
Passport (Amendment) Act of December 11, 1957, the accused K. has
rendered himself liable to punishment because he tried to leave the German
Democratic Republic illegally. The attempt was abortive. The accused
is therefore liable to punishment because of an attempted breach of the
passport regulations. The accused P. aided and abetted the accused
K. in his attempt to leave the GDR illegally, by trying to slip him through
the control at our State border in his car. He is liable to punishment
for aiding and abetting.
In deciding sentence, the considerable danger to society involved by the
acts of the accused persons must be an essential factor.' (Emphases added).
In view of the undiminished extent of the escape movement
the issue of passports and exit visas by the competent authorities
in the GDR was subjected to increasing restrictions. From 1957
onward, for example, permits to travel to the Federal Republic
were, but for rare exceptions, refused to specified groups (university
students, high school students, members of the Free German
Youth, teachers, employees of the public administration and of
nationalized concerns). In the spring of 1959 a special procedure
for the granting of travel permits was introduced. The initial
handling of applications for travel permits was transferred in
all local government districts to the " Committees for All-German
Work ". The Committees' decisions were checked by the People's
Police. More recently, the District Offices of the People's Police
have dealt with the issuing of travel permits.
11 Neue Justiz (East Berlin: a journal published by the Ministry of Justice
the Supreme Court and the Attorney-General of the GDR), 1961, p. 617
et seq.
Approved For Release 2000/08/27 : CIA-RDP78-03061A000100050019-7
 Approved For Release 2000/08/27 : CIA-RDP78-03061A000100050019-7
The Offence Known as False Proselytism
The penal measures to combat the flight from the Republic
contained in the passport legislation of the GDR and the corres-
ponding passport regulations of the East Berlin Municipal Council
were supplemented by the Act of December 11, 1957, laying down
additional provisions to the Penal Code. Section 21 (1) of the
Act introduced a new activity punishable by law, i.e., that of
" suborning into leaving the German Democratic Republic ". To
describe this activity, the Minister of Justice of the GDR, Hilde
Benjamin, coined the phrase " false proselytism " (literally trans-
lated from the German by the words " recruiting away "). Under
this Section, sentences of up to 15 years imprisonment and pos-
sible confiscation of property could be imposed on any person
who undertakes to suborn a person into leaving the German Democratic
Republic
(1) on behalf of organizations of agents, espionage agencies or the like,
or of commercial undertakings, or
(2) with a view to service in organizations of mercenaries.
Under Section 21 (2) of the above amending Act, sentence of
not less than six months imprisonment was to be imposed on
any person attempting to suborn a young person, or a person undergoing
vocational training, or any other person, by reason of such person's
occupational activity or specialized capacities or skills, by the use of threats,
deceptions, promises or other similar methods of influencing freedom
of choice, into leaving the German Democratic Republic.
The above quoted provision describes the elements of the
offence of false proselytism. Light on what may be regarded
as culpable " methods influencing freedom of choice " has been
shed by an article published by Gustav Jahn, Vice-President of
the Supreme Court of the GDR. 2 This article states, inter alias
Methods of suborning include the content and manner of exercising ideo-
logical influence, the motivation and reasoning whereby it is represented
as proper and necessary to leave the GDR: the promise of a job, accom-
modation, the extolling of actual conditions in West Germany (in itself
a deception), etc. The methods mainly employed are:
1. Extolling conditions in West Germany. About a third of the sub-
orners base their false proselytism on the declarations in West Germany
Approved For Release 2000/08/27 : CIA-RDP78-03061A000100050019-7
 Approved For Release 2000/08/27 : CIA-RDP78-03061A000100050019-7
that the deserter will find " real freedom " and " better living conditions "
than in the GDR. All cases where the suborners referred to alleged
advantages of living in West Germany come under this method.
2. The next method is persuasion. As Kuhlig has already explained, this
usually consists in talking over one who is already weakening, in strength-
ening his resolve, removing his doubts, etc. As KUhlig explains, it is
generally linked with promises, extolling conditions, etc. Precisely
because of this, it is necessary-contrary to Kiihlig's opinion-to illustrate
independently the related methods, and not let them be included in persua-
sion. Persuasion can also embrace some elements of promise and
deception.
3. Following persuasion there is the method of promises-specifically
mentioned in the Law. The enticement offered is the prospect of a live-
lihood after desertion. The promises are, however, mostly demagogic
and turn out to be baseless. They comprise a low, cunning trick and
illustrate the whole character of this false proselytism.
The German Democratic Republic Accuses the Federal Republic of
Germany of Trading in People
It need not be supposed from the foregoing account of the
crime of false proselytism that there was any need for the
legislators of the GDR to create such an offence. In fact the
offence was created so that the assumption would be made that
" organizations of agents, espionage, agencies and so on " did
in fact exist. In this way the GDR regime offered an explanation
of the distressing phenomena of the flight from the Republic,
which, it was hoped, the world would believe. It was a case of
the wish being father to the thought. Even Walter Ulbricht,
First Secretary of the Central Committee of the Socialist Unity
Party of Germany, the SED,3 and Chairman of the State Council
of the GDR, did not solely blame the West for the mass flight
from the GDR when he declared on March 20, 1961, before the
Central Committee of SED :
It constantly happens that valued citizens foresake the German Democratic
Republic because they have been subjected to bureaucratic and incon-
siderate treatment by State offices and, in many cases, by Party organs, and
because their justified desires have been neglected. In such a mood they
often fall prey to false proselytism, the systematic trade in people directed
by Bonn.
The main cause is not, however, sought in the GDR's own
mistakes. In Communist phraseology, the cause rather lies in
the aim of the West German militarists to sap the economic
3 SED is in fact the Communist party in the GDR. Also see below p. 23.
Approved For Release 2000/08/27 : CIA-RDP78-03061A000100050019-7
 Approved For Release 2000/08/27 : CIA-RDP78-03061A000100050019-7
potential of the GDR, to use the refugees as spies and cannon
fodder and to bring the GDR, and thus the whole socialist camp,
into discredit before the bar of world public opinion by referring
to the high numbers of refugees. This interpretation can also
be found in court practice, e.g., in a judgment of the Supreme
Court of August 2, 1961, in re Adamo and others, where the
following may be found :
The victims are enticed to West Berlin on the pretence of having a harmless
discussion; there they are induced to abandon their assured living and
betray the German Democratic Republic. In West Berlin, under the
so-called Emergency Reception Procedure they are severely interrogated
by the secret services of West Germany and other imperialist countries
and have to provide these agents with links for spreading the trade in
people. From West Berlin they are sent to West Germany to be exploited
to the full. From West Berlin traders in people supply the NATO
barracks where young men, contrary to their own interests, are drilled
by Nazi officers as cannon fodder for the imperialists. The path of many
women and girls leads via West Berlin to the sink of iniquity. For many,
West Berlin is the first stop on the road to the gutter or to death. 4
These utterances, surprising in the judgment of a Supreme
Court, can hardly be regarded as anything other than compliance
with the regulation that " a judge must strive unreservedly for
the triumph of socialism in the GDR and must loyally support
the power of the workers and peasants." 5 A judge in the GDR
must live by the rule of socialist legality. This " sets judges the
task of contributing, by their proceedings and in every decision,
to strengthening the power of the workers and peasants.,' In
other words the task of supporting the Government as it exists
under the Communist system.
The Closed Areas
The legislation to prevent flight from the Republic was comple-
mented by the establishment of a closed area along the 859 mile
long frontier between the GDR and the Federal Republic. This
area comprises an 11 yards wide control strip, a 548 yards wide
barrier strip and a 3 mile wide closed zone. Life in the closed
zone is subject to numerous restrictions.7 A special police permit
Neue Justiz 1961, p. 550.
Section 15, Organization of the Judiciary Act, 1959 (GDR).
6 Gericht und Rechtsprechung in der DDR (a Journal published by the
Ministry of Justice of the GDR).
7 New Regulations were contained in an Ordinance of the GDR of June 18,
1954.
Approved For Release 2000/08/27 : CIA-RDP78-03061A000100050019-7
 Approved For Release 2000/08/27 : CIA-RDP78-03061A000100050019-7
is required to visit the closed area; to visit the barrier strip requires,
in addition, permission from the local border police command
post. It is forbidden to set foot on the control strip which has
been cleared of timber and ploughed over. Persons doing so are
fired on without warning.
In the summer of 1952 there was extensive forced evacuation
from the closed area, which led to a wave of escapes. The GDR
authorities proceeded to further compulsory evacuation after
August 13, 1961. As could be observed from West German
territory, most of the evacuation was carried out under heavy
military guard. In the Bavarian-Thuringian frontier area many
farm buildings were demolished. How little it was a question of
voluntary removal from the " danger area of the State border "
- the official GDR version - could be seen from the rise in the
number of refugees from the areas concerned and the deployment
of units of the People's Police and of armed factory militia groups.
A closed area was also established along the 68 mile long border
between West Berlin and GDR territory.
The Constitution of the GDR of August 3, 1950, guarantees
freedom of movement within the GDR (Article 8) and freedom to
emigrate (Article 10) which is rightly called " one of the truly basic
freedoms ". Both these freedoms are furthermore embodied in
Article 13 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights adopted
by the General Assembly of the United Nations. The relevant
provisions of the Constitution of the GDR permit, however, res-
triction by law of the right to unimpeded choice of residence
within the State and of the right to emigrate. It is, on the other
hand, an uncontested principle that a constitutional right may
not be basically infringed by means of legal restrictions. The
Basic Law of the Federal Republic, for instance, contains a specific
provision to that effect in Article 19, Section 2. Under Article 29
of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the free exercise
of rights and freedoms may only be subjected to such restrictions
as are determined by law solely for the purpose of securing due recogni-
tion and respect for the rights and freedoms of others and of meeting
the just requirements of morality, public order and the general welfare
in a democratic society.
With the legislation described above and the judicial and ad-
ministrative practices based thereon the GDR Government has
acted in patent contempt of basic rights guaranteed by the Consti-
tution of the GDR.
Approved For Release 2000/08/27 : CIA-RDP78-03061A000100050019-7
 Approved For Release 2000/08/27 : CIA-RDP78-03061A000100050019-7
The Open Door
Until August 13, 1961, the position at the Sector border between
West Berlin and East Berlin was different. On the basis of the
Four Power agreements regarding Greater Berlin there was in
practice freedom of movement. The details of the arrangement
are discussed below. To get a correct legal assessment of the
sealing off of East Berlin from West Berlin which began on August
13, 1961, it is necessary to describe the status of Greater Berlin
as agreed on by the occupation Powers.
III. THE CONSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENT OF
GREATER BERLIN
The Inter-Allied Agreements concerning Germany and Greater
Berlin
For occupation purposes Germany was divided, on the basis
of its borders as at December 31, 1937, into four Zones, each
occupying power being allocated one Zone, and a separate territory
of Greater Berlin to be administered jointly by the occupying
powers.
The following diplomatic instruments determined, in essence,
the legal status of Greater Berlin:
(i) Protocol of September 12, 1944, between the Governments of the
United States of America, the United Kingdom and the Union of Soviet
Socialist Republics on the occupation Zones in Germany and the admi-
nistration of Greater Berlin.
(ii) Agreement of November 14, 1944, between the United States of
America, the United Kingdom and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics
on the control machinery in Germany.
(iii) Agreement of May 1, 1945, between the Governments of the United
States of America, the United Kingdom, the Union of Soviet Socialist
Republics and the Provisional Government of the French Republic regard-
ing amendments to the Agreement of November 14, 1944, on control
machinery in Germany, by which a fourth occupation Zone in Germany
and a fourth Sector in Greater Berlin were created to be administered
by the Provisional Government of the French Republic.
(iv) Statement of June 5, 1945, by the Governments of the United States
of America, the United Kingdom, the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics
and the Provisional Government of the French Republic on the Zones
of occupation in Germany.
Approved For Release 2000/08/27 : CIA-RDP78-03061A000100050019-7
 Approved For Release 2000/08/27 : CIA-RDP78-03061A000100050019-7
(v) Statement of June 5, 1945, by the Governments of the United States
of America, the United Kingdom, the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics
and the Provisional Government of the French Republic on control
machinery in Germany.
(vi) Agreement of July 26, 1945, between the Government of the United
States of America, the United Kingdom, the Union of Soviet Socialist
Republics and the Provisional Government of the French Republic regard-
ing amendments to the Protocol of September 12, 1944, on the Zones of
occupation in Germany and the administration of Greater Berlin.
The occupation troops in each Zone came under a Commander-
in-Chief (Zone Commander) appointed by the responsible Power.
Greater Berlin was divided into four Sectors. A basic point
is that the area of Greater Berlin came under joint administration
of the four Powers. For this purpose an Inter-Allied Governing
Authority, the Kommandatura, was set up, composed of four
Commandants, appointed by their respective Zone Commanders.
The four Commandants were aided by experts, whose task was
to supervise and watch over the activities of the local German
authorities. Ranking above the Kommandatura of Greater Berlin
there was the Inter-Allied Control Council, composed of the Zone
Commanders. In Germany this Council held supreme power,
each member in his own occupation Zone and jointly where matters
concerning Germany as a whole were involved. In accordance
with Article 8 of the Statement of June 5, 1945, on control ma-
chinery in Germany, the administrative system described above was
valid " for the period of occupation following German surrender
when Germany is carrying out the basic requirements of uncon-
ditional surrender ". Arrangements for the time following that
period were to be the subject of a special agreement.
The Report of August 2, 1945, on the Potsdam Three-Power
Conference contained " Directives for the Political and Economic
Treatment of Germany during the Initial Control Period ". In
regard to the political directives, the following principles call
for special mention.
2. So far as practicable, there shall be uniformity of treatment of the
German population throughout Germany.
4. All Nazi laws which provided the basis of the Hitler regime or estab-
lished discriminations on grounds of race, creed or political opinion shall
be abolished. No such discriminations, whether legal, administrative or
otherwise, shall be tolerated.
Approved For Release 2000/08/27 : CIA-RDP78-03061A000100050019-7
 Approved For Release 2000/08/27 : CIA-RDP78-03061A000100050019-7
8. The judicial system will be reorganized in accordance with the prin-
ciples of democracy, of justice under law, and of equal rights for all citizens
without distinction of race, nationality or religion.
9. The administration of affairs in Germany should be directed towards
the decentralization of the political structure and the development of local
responsibility. To this end, ...
(ii) all democratic political parties with rights of assembly and of public
discussion shall be allowed and encouraged throughout Germany;
(iv) for the time being, no central German Government shall be estab-
lished. Notwithstanding this, however, certain essential central German
administrative departments, headed by State Secretaries, shall be estab-
lished, particularly in the fields of finance, transport, communications,
foreign trade and industry. Such departments will act under the direction
of the Control Council.
10. Subject to the necessity for maintaining military security, freedom
of speech, press and religion shall be permitted, and religious institutions
shall be respected. Subject likewise to the maintenance of military security,
the formation of free trade unions shall be permitted.
The Kommandatura for the Greater Berlin area was constituted
on July 7, 1945, and met for the first time on July 11, 1945. On
August 13, 1946, it promulgated a " Temporary Constitution of
Greater Berlin ", the underlying principles of which had been
discussed with the authorized political parties. In a letter of the
same date the Kommandatura emphasized that the Constitution
placed full authority in the hands of representatives elected by
the people-the municipal delegates.,, This Municipal Assembly
8 In his painstaking monograph on The Legal, Political and Economic
Position of the Soviet Sector of Berlin published by Kulturbuch-Verlag West
Berlin in 1954, Walter Brunn wrote on page 2: " The Municipal Assembly
had general legislative power, but Article 13 provided that the decisions of the
representative body in matters relating to the passing of decrees (Article 5,
para. II) were valid within the jurisdiction only if such decisions were taken
by the Municipal Assembly in conjunction with the Municipal Council, as
the supreme administrative and executive organ. In matters pertaining to
decrees, mostly concerning legislation, the Municipal Council thus functioned
in conjunction with the Assembly, acting as a second legislative chamber.
The Temporary Constitution further provided that the elected representatives,
should, as a constituent assembly, undertake the elaboration of a widely-based
definitive Constitution for the city of Berlin. Thedraft of this Constitution
was, in accordance with Article 35 of the Temporary Constitution, to be
submitted for approval to the Allied Powers by May 1, 1948. "
22
Approved For Release 2000/08/27 : CIA-RDP78-03061A000100050019-7
 Approved For Release 2000/08/27 : CIA-RDP78-03061A000100050019-7
was elected on October 20, 1946. With a poll of 92.3 Y. the
distribution of the 2,085,338 valid votes cast was as follows:
SPD (Social Democratic Party) . . . .
1,015,609 =
48.7 %
CDU (Christian Democratic Union) . .
462,425 =
22.2 %
SED (Socialist Unity Party, i.e., the Com-
munists) . . . . . . . . . .
412,582 =
19.8%
LDP (Liberal Democratic Party) . . . .
194,722 =
9.3 %
Well in advance of the elections the Communists throughout
Germany were already pressing for a merger of the Social Demo-
cratic and Communist Parties. The Social Democratic Party had
arranged for a primary vote by its members on this question to
be held on March 31, 1946. In East Berlin, the Soviet Commandant
prevented the taking of this vote, while the vote taken in West
Berlin resulted in an overwhelming majority agreement against
the merger. This outcome notwithstanding, there was founded
on April 21, 1946, the SED, which was an amalgamation between
the Social Democratic Party and the Communist Party. At the
same time members of the Social Democratic Party living in the
Soviet Zone and in East Berlin were absorbed, without consultation,
into the SED.
On June 24, 1947, the Municipal Assembly elected Ernst Reuter
Mayor of Greater Berlin. The Soviet representative on the Allied
Kommandatura vetoed the election; viewed in the ensuing course
of events this veto represented the first step in the splitting up
of Greater Berlin.
Breakdown in the Kommandatura
In September 1948 Communist-staged unrest, against which the
police of the Soviet Sector took no action, made it impossible for
the Municipal Assembly, then sitting in East Berlin, to continue
its work undisturbed. The Assembly was therefore obliged to
transfer its meeting place from the Soviet Sector to West Berlin.
Subsequent events are recounted by Walter Brunn as follows:
Unilateral Soviet interference, not approved by the Western Allies, affecting
the self-government of Berlin gradually spread to all departments of the
Municipal Council, the final result being a split in the administration of
Berlin as a whole. This process terminated in the proclamation issued
at a meeting of the Municipal Council for the Soviet Sector of Berlin
held in the Admiralspalast on November 30, 1948. On that day according
to reports in the Soviet Zone press, 236 " members of the parties forming
Approved For Release 2000/08/27 : CIA-RDP78-03061A000100050019-7
 Approved For Release 2000/08/27 : CIA-RDP78-03061A000100050019-7
the Democratic Bloc ", 229 " delegates of democratic mass organizations "
and 1151 " delegates from Berlin factories " met in " an extraordinary
Municipal Assembly ". On a motion by the " Democratic Bloc " the
previous Municipal Council for Greater Berlin was declared dissolved and
a new Municipal Council was " elected ", the chairmanship of which was
entrusted to Fritz Ebert, former President of the Brandenburg Provincial
Assembly.
By declaration of the Soviet Commandant of Berlin dated December 2,
1948, (VOBL 1948, p. 435) B " the provisional Municipal Council of
Greater Berlin elected by the Extraordinary Assembly of November 30,
1948, is recognised as the sole legitimate State administrative organ ".
At the same time the Soviet Commandant announced that he would give
this provisional Municipal Council all the help and support required to
enable it to exercise its functions in the interest of the population.'?
Cooperation between the Soviet Union and the Western Allies
in the Kommandatura had already broken down on July 1, 1948.
From this date until December 21, 1948, the Allied Kommandatura
suspended its activities. On the latter date the Commandants of
the Western Sectors of Berlin announced, in a joint communique,
as follows :
The Temporary Constitution of Berlin, which was approved by all four
Allies in 1946, requires that legislation and certain other acts of the
Magistrat [Municipal Council] and City Assembly [Municipal Assembly]
shall receive Allied approval. The refusal of the Soviet Authorities to
attend meetings of the Allied Kommandatura cannot any longer be allowed
to obstruct the proper administration of Berlin, according to the law.
The Allied Kommandatura will therefore resume its work forthwith. If
the Soviet Authorities, either now or at a future date, decide to abide by
the agreements to which the four Powers are committed, the quadripartite
administration of Berlin could be resumed. During their abstentions the
three Western Allies will exercise the powers of the Allied Kommandatura
although it is realized that owing to Soviet obstruction it will only be
possible for them to carry out their decisions in the Western Sectors for
the present.
Separate Constitutions for West and East Berlin
The events portrayed (the splitting of Berlin, temporary sus-
pension of the activities of the Allied Kommandatura) prevented
the approval by the Kommandatura of the definitive Constitution
of West Berlin which had been passed at its third reading on
April 22, 1948, by the Municipal Assembly freely elected in 1946.
9 VOBL stands for Verordnungsblatt; this is the official Government Gazette
of the GDR for publishing Ordinances.
ILO Walter Brunn, op. cit. pp. 3-4.
24
Approved For Release 2000/08/27 : CIA-RDP78-03061A000100050019-7
 Approved For Release 2000/08/27 : CIA-RDP78-03061A000100050019-7
Only in 1950 were negotiations for that purpose begun with the rump
Kommandatura. The resultant Constitution of September 1,
1950, came into force one month later on October 1, but in view of
the division which had occurred it applied only to the Western
Sectors of Berlin. In the Soviet Sector the promulgation on
June 8, 1950, of the " Main Statute for the Administration of
Greater Berlin " laid the legal foundation for the Municipal
Council illegally elected on November 30, 1948. Under this
statute the Municipal Council, an executive organ, was empowered
to legislate, a power which it had exercised since its constitution
without statutory authority. A reason for this was that the repre-
sentatives of various " democratic mass organizations " and
" delegates from Berlin factories " forming the " Democratic Bloc ",
did not at their meeting of November 30, 1948, elect a legislative
Municipal Assembly. This stage in the separate constitutional
development of the Soviet Sector of Berlin, arising from the division
of the city, terminated with the promulgation of the " Ordinance
respecting further democratization of the structure and procedures
of the ... organs of Greater Berlin " of January 19, 1953, and
the " Provisional order for the structure and procedures of the ...
organs of Greater Berlin " of January 23, 1953, based thereon.
The regulations made under these two Ordinances were termed
" provisional orders " since definitive regulations were to be issued
after the reunification of Berlin. These regulations brought the
administrative structure of the Soviet Sector of Berlin into line
with the position obtaining in the GDR since the administrative
reform carried out in June 1952. The preamble to the Ordinance
of January 19, 1953, stated this purpose quite clearly:
The establishment of the foundations of socialism in Greater Berlin,
following the example of the German Democratic Republic, postulates
further democratization of the organs of State authority in the capital,
together with an improvement in their structure and procedure.
Legislative development following the division of Berlin led
to a de facto alignment of East Berlin with the GDR; indeed
East Berlin became the capital of the GDR. In view, however,
of the Four Power agreements, East Berlin was not formally
incorporated in the GDR. Consistently with those agreements
it could not be. Nevertheless, the force of all important legis-
lative enactments of the GDR was extended to East Berlin;
this has usually been done by the East Berlin Municipal Council
legislating itself for the application in the Soviet Sector of the
legislative instruments of the GDR. On the other hand, the so-
Approved For Release 2000/08/27 : CIA-RDP78-03061A000100050019-7
 Approved For Release 2000/08/27 : CIA-RDP78-03061A000100050019-7
called Third Transitional Law passed by the German Bundestag
on January 4, 1952, has assimilated West Berlin to the Federal
States of the Federal Republic of Germany in matters of law,
finance and economics. With the exception of legislation respect-
ing defence, Federal legislation is submitted for summary adoption
to the Berlin Chamber of Deputies for application to West Berlin;
the Allied Kommandatura does, however, retain the right of veto.
Freedom of Movement in Greater Berlin
The free travel of individuals between the Soviet and. Western
Sectors of the city was not affected by the division of Greater
Berlin, as described above, provided such travel was not for the
purpose of a long stay or a transfer of residence. To that extent
therefore there was freedom of movement and Greater Berlin
remained a unified area in accordance with the Four Power
agreements referred to above (the Four Power agreements
have never been repealed). East Berliners could work in the
Western Sectors and West Berliners in the Eastern Sectors (these
workers have been termed the " transfrontier " workers); the
East Berliners were not prevented from attending theatre perform-
ances, concerts, lectures, cinema shows in West Berlin in large
numbers, or from making purchases etc. there. West Berliners
could meet anywhere in Greater Berlin members of their family,
relatives, friends or acquaintances living in East Berlin. The
immeasurable tightly-woven network of human relationships was
not affected throughout the whole Greater Berlin area.
Under GDR and East Berlin legislation the legal position was
as follows :
For inhabitants of West Berlin: There was until August 13,
1961, no restriction either in fact or in law on West Berliners
visiting East Berlin, provided the visit was only temporary.'1
For other purposes, West Berliners required a visitor's residence
permit. Today all access to East Berlin is barred without a
visitor's residence permit.12
For inhabitants of East Berlin and the GDR: Until August 13,
1961, there was no limitation on the travel of East Berliners and
11 Citizens of the Federal Republic required a special laissez passer to
visit East Berlin as from September 18, 1960.
12 Instruction of the Ministry of the Interior of the GDR, dated August 22,
1961.
26
Approved For Release 2000/08/27 : CIA-RDP78-03061A000100050019-7
 Approved For Release 2000/08/27 : CIA-RDP78-03061A000100050019-7
inhabitants of the GDR to West Berlin for the purpose of a tem-
porary visit. For a long stay in Berlin or for transfer of residence
from East to West Berlin the GDR regulations governing emigra-
tion to the Federal Republic were applicable, namely an Ordinance
of October 29, 1953, respecting the issue of identity cards. The
provisions of this Ordinance were applicable to inhabitants of
East Berlin, and were put into operation there by an Ordinance
of the Municipal Council dated November 11, 1953.
Similarly, the scope of the Passport (Amendment) Act of 1957 13
laying down penalities for fleeing the Republic was extended to
East Berlin. The regulations applying to personal movement
within Greater Berlin meant in practice that the People's Police of
the Soviet Sector could do no more than operate random checks,
in view of the right to free passage of the border for short-term
stays. All the same, there were many cases where persons were
detained at the frontier because their baggage or their nervous
behaviour gave them away or because they had been denounced
by People's Police informers. However, the brisk movement in
both directions across the Sector border made it relatively easy
for a determined person to pass through the spot checks operated
by the People's Police.
It was therefore inevitable that Berlin should become " Freedom
Gate " after the border between the GDR and the Federal Republic
had become a closed zone. In July 1961 over 30,000 persons
fled to the West by way of this gate. In the beginning of August,
the numbers of East Germans fleeing each day rose steadily :
on August 2, 1961, it was 1,322, over the weekend from August
6 to 7 it was 3,268, on August 8 it was 1,741 and on August 9
it was 1,926. No words could demonstrate more dramatically
than these figures the contrast between life in East Berlin and the
hope of freedom, although by no means necessarily of prosperity,
in the West.
Approved For Release 2000/08/27 : CIA-RDP78-03061A000100050019-7
 Approved For Release 2000/08/27 : CIA-RDP78-03061A000100050019-7
IV. THE SEALING OFF OF EAST BERLIN
The Council of Ministers of the German Democratic Republic is
Authorized to Proceed with Full Territorial Separation
A Resolution by the Consultative Political Committee of the
Member States of the Warsaw Pact provided the Council of
Ministers of the GDR with the pretext for its measures to seal
off the Soviet Sector of Berlin and to increase its clamp-down
on relations between the GDR and the West. This Resolution
was not dated, but it was published in the principal newspaper
of the Communist SED, the daily Neues Deutschland, on August
13, 1961, part of it reading as follows:
The Governments of the Warsaw Pact States propose to the People's
Chamber and the Government of the GDR and to all the workers of
the GDR that they take action to introduce a system at the border of
West Berlin that will effectively check the subversive action against the
countries of the Socialist camp and install a reliable watch and control
around the whole area of West Berlin including its boundaries with demo-
cratic Berlin... The Governments of the Warsaw Pact States naturally
understand that the introduction of protective measures on the border of
West Berlin will create a certain degree of inconvenience for the population
but in view of the situation which has arisen the whole blame for this falls
on the Western Powers and particularly on the Government of the Federal
Republic... (Emphasis added),
Following this Resolution, the People's Chamber, the Parlia-
ment of the GDR, instructed the Council of Ministers of the GDR
on August 11, 1961, " to prepare and take all action required in
view of the facts noted by the Member States of the Warsaw Pact
and of this decision " (by the People's Chamber). At the same
time it confirmed " the steps taken by the Council of Ministers,
the Municipal Council of Greater Berlin and the Councils of the
Districts of Potsdam and Frankfurt-on-Oder for the security of
the GDR and the prevention of the head-hunting and slave trade
practised from Western Germany and West Berlin."
Referring to the Resolutions of the Warsaw Pact States and the
People's Chamber, the Council of Ministers of the GDR decreed
on August 12, 1961,
Approved For Release 2000/08/27 : CIA-RDP78-03061A000100050019-7
 Approved For Release 2000/08/27 : CIA-RDP78-03061A000100050019-7
... the following measures for the protection of the GDR and in the
interests of the security of the States of the Socialist camp:
In order to prevent the unfriendly activities of the revenge-seeking and
militaristic powers in Western Germany and West Berlin, a system of
control shall be set up at the borders of the GDR, including the border
with the Western Sectors of Greater Berlin such as exists on the borders
of every sovereign State. A reliable watch and effective control shall be
ensured at the borders of West Berlin in order to prevent subversive activity.
Citizens of the GDR may henceforth cross these borders only with special
authority. Until such time as West Berlin is transformed into a demili-
tarized neutral free city, citizens of the capital of the GDR shall require
special permission in order to cross the borders to West Berlin... The
Minister of the Interior, the Minister of Transport and the Mayor of
Greater Berlin are instructed to issue the appropriate executive orders.
This decision regarding action in order to safeguard peace, to protect
the GDR, in particular its capital Berlin, and to guarantee the security
of other Socialist States shall remain in force until the conclusion of a
German peace treaty. (Emphases added).
In accordance with the decision of the Council of Ministers of
August 12, 1961, quoted above, the Minister of the Interior
issued an Instruction the same day, stating :
2. Citizens of the German Democratic Republic, including citizens of
the capital of the German Democratic Republic (of Democratic Berlin)
shall require authorization from their competent People's Police District
Office or from their local People's Police Inspectorate in order to visit
West Berlin.
6. Citizens of the German Democratic Republic not working in Berlin
are requested to refrain henceforth from travelling to Berlin.
What is actually happening is that Party and Press bring pressure
to bear on citizens of the GDR and East Berlin to dissuade them
from travelling to the West. Citizens are called upon to make
binding statements that they will not apply for permits to travel
or to leave the country. The newspapers in the GDR and East
Berlin have published large numbers of such declarations. For
instance, the occupants of No. 23 Wilhelm-Pieck-Allee, Magde-
burg, declared :
We have discussed the matter and now declare that we shall not visit the
Federal Republic until a peace treaty has been signed. 14
Approved For Release 2000/08/27 : CIA-RDP78-03061A000100050019-7
 Approved For Release 2000/08/27 : CIA-RDP78-03061A000100050019-7
Anyone applying for a permit to travel or to go to the Federal
Republic or West Berlin must expect his application to be turned
down. Neues Deutschland printed an open letter to a female
citizen of the GDR under the heading " Aunt Frieda and Peace-
or Citizens of the GDR and Journeys to the West ". One passage
read:
In the same way as you prevent travellers from entering a treacherous
swamp by putting up a warning sign and a barrier, we have now protected
our frontiers and will issue travel permits for Western Germany only
in particularly justified cases. 11
The new regulations, amounting to a total removal of the free-
dom of movement previously respected in Greater Berlin, treat
as fleeing the Republic any unauthorized crossing towards West
Berlin of the frontier dividing Greater Berlin in two. An offender
is liable to a prisonsentence of up to 3 years under Section 1 of the
Passport (Amendment) Act 1957 and preparation or attempted
passage are also liable to prosecution.
The Transfrontier Workers
The effect of cordoning-off fell particularly heavily on the
transfrontier workers, the 52,000 East Berliners who worked in
the Western Sectors of Berlin. The text of the relevant East Berlin
announcement will be found at Appendix A.
The problem of transfrontier workers had always been a thorn
in the side of the Soviet Sector authorities. In 1955 a campaign
began against the transfrontier workers. This campaign was
systematically stepped up in the early summer of 1961. The
press in the GDR referred to these people as black marketeers,
work-shy elements, parasites and so on. It was stated that by
profiting from the division of the country they had forfeited any
right to share in the benefits of socialist construction. They were
turned out of new housing and prevented from buying certain
industrial products by the East Berlin Ordinance of June 30,
1961, supplementing the Ordinance to prevent speculation in
food and industrial products of November 27, 1952. There was
an increasing volume of charges of " illegal importation of cur-
rency " and of offences against the East Berlin Ordinance concern-
ing statistical recording of employment data of January 14, 1953.
The latter Ordinance required East Berliners who had taken up
Approved For Release 2000/08/27 : CIA-RDP78-03061A000100050019-7
 Approved,For Release 2000/08/27 : CIA-RDP78-03061A000100050019-7
employment in West Berlin after January 26, 1953, to apply for
authorization to the East Berlin employment office, and this was
invariably refused. On August 4, 1961, the East Berlin Municipal
Council ordered registration of all citizens of the GDR and of
East Berlin working in West Berlin. A few days later, on August
9, the Municipal Council issued an Ordinance requiring all trans-
frontier workers living in East Berlin to pay their rents, their
taxes and their public rates in DMark West. This meant a
substantial financial loss for such transfrontier workers, who
could get 5 DMark East in West Berlin for 1 DMark West, as
opposed to an official exchange rate of 1 to 1. The purpose
was to make the transfrontier workers give up their jobs in West
Berlin.
The legislation aimed at eliminating freedom of movement within
Greater Berlin, with its threats of punishment for flight from the
GDR and subornment thereto, has been supplemented by the
measures now known throughout the world by which the Soviet
Sector of Berlin has been shut off. A Wall was constructed,
beginning on August 13, 1961, the length of the 26 miles of
border between East and West Berlin. Its height varied between
7 and 13 feet; in addition barriers were made of uprooted trees
and barbed wire entanglements; wire fencing was erected, road
surfaces torn up, ditches dug and so on. The tracks of the over-
head railway line connecting West and East Berlin were torn up
and twisted at the border stations situated in the Soviet Sector.
Where the Sector boundary followed a length of houses in the
Soviet Sector, the doors and windows facing towards the border
were barricaded or bricked up so as not to serve for escape purposes.
For the same reason, the entry to the Church of the Atonement
in Bernauerstrasse facing the border was also walled up. It was
one of the churches whose services were regularly attended by
people from both parts of Berlin. Thousands of East Berlin
workers including women and children, were ordered to raze
allotments and other cultivated land near the border and to pull
down the summer-houses and sheds there in order to facilitate
frontier control.
Many occupants of houses near the border were forcibly evicted;
first of all transfrontier workers and their families, secondly
citizens who had failed to vote at elections and then persons noted
Approved For Release 2000/08/27 : CIA-RDP78-03061A000100050019-7
 Approved For Release 2000/08/27 : CIA-RDP78-03061A000100050019-7
by the People's Police as "unreliable elements ". Members of
the SED generally remained excluded from such eviction.
The East Berlin authorities argued that such eviction was carried
out in the interests and for the protection of the people living near
the Sector border, and that many of those concerned had them-
selves asked for this to be done. The statement of a householder
from East Berlin who managed to escape shortly before being
evicted gives a more accurate picture, specially when it is remem-
bered that after eviction people were accommodated mostly in
gymnasia and barracks :
A few days after the Eastern Sector was sealed off on August 13, 1961,
the local head of the People's Police had a card index prepared of all
persons living in the area. This boded no good... On the afternoon
of September 20, 1961, I went to the Harzerstrasse in Treptow and saw
how people's furniture was being loaded on to removal vans and taken
away, and that this was going on all the time. Women were standing
around weeping. One woman told me that houses had already been
cleared in this way a few days before... I was afraid that I would not
only be thrown out of the house but sent away into the Zone, for the
People's Police had already told us that pensioners could earn a little
extra if they went potato picking.
Little is known so far as to what regulations, if any, the East
Berlin Authorities may have invoked in order to justify the evic-
tions, the destruction of summer-houses, the razing of allotments
and so on. The Ministry for All-German Affairs of the Federal
Republic in Bonn has records of one case in which a movement
order was based on Section 14 of the Prussian Police Administra-
tion Act of June 1, 1931, under which the police authorities are
required to take whatever action is necessary under existing laws
in order to protect the community or the individual against dangers
liable to threaten public security or order. It might also be
possible to cite certain provisions of the new Defence Act, which
furnish numerous opportunities for substantial encroachment
on the sphere of the rights of the individual, should these measures
be applied to East Berlin. The Act for the Defence of the German
Democratic Republic of September 20, 1961, is an emergency law
justified in the preamble by means of the alleged increased military
preparations of the West German " militarists ". This Act cites
the main occasions when the provision of goods and services can
be demanded of social organizations, cooperatives, associations
and of individual citizens. But such occasions will not arise until
a State of Emergency has been proclaimed by the Chairman of
the State Council, who is at present Walter Ulbricht. However,
Approved For Release 2000/08/27 : CIA-RDP78-03061A000100050019-7
 Approved For Release 2000/08/27 : CIA-RDP78-03061A000100050019-7
certain provisions of the Defence Act may be applied even before
a State of Emergency has been proclaimed. These include
Section 9 (provisions for the preparation of supplies and services)
and Section 15 (access to particular areas), Subsection (2) and
Subsection (1) of which read, respectively, as follows:
9 (2) In the case of real property, an order may be issued preventing any
alteration to the character of the land or the carrying out of any alterations
in a particular manner.
15 (1) At the request of the heads of the offices and units of the national
People's Army, access to specific areas may, in the interest of the defence
of the Republic, be prohibited by offices of the People's Police either
permanently or for the duration of exercises or transport, or may be made
dependent on special authorization.
Residence in such areas may be either wholly or partly prohibited.
According to Section 19 of the Defence Act there is no judicial
redress regarding compensation for damages or claims for payment
in respect of provision of services.
A Divided City
How densely the network of human relationships within Berlin
is interwoven has already been described. It has been shown that
the constitutional and administrative cleavage of Berlin had no
more adverse an effect on human contacts than the existence of
the frontiers between its Sectors had had. The population of a city
is a community bound together by so many shared interests that
it may be compared to a large family. The Berlin family was
disrupted with a brutality that defies exaggeration on August 13,
1961. Within the city community individual families were espe-
cially hard hit by the building of the Wall. Only after August 13
did it become manifest how many West Berliners still had relatives
in the Eastern Sector of Berlin or in the GDR. The examples
given below illustrate the nature of the problem encountered :
The aged father still lives over there in Prenzlauer Berg; his family visited
him or he came over for the day to look after his grandchild. There
was an aunt from Dresden who came to stay regularly, bought shoes,
which are so bad and dear over there, got in supplies of all the small house-
hold goods which are not to be found under the planned economy and
braced herself in the free air of West Berlin for a return to the grim daily
life of Ulbricht's " first German State of the Workers and Peasants ".
Families who had lived for years in the GDR and the Federal Republic
were reunited for a few days in West Berlin; however apart in distance
their lives had grown, the family ties still held fast...
Approved For Release 2000/08/27 : CIA-RDP78-03061A000100050019-7
 Approved For Release 2000/08/27 : CIA-RDP78-03061A000100050019-7
Individual lives were particularly hard hit by the unexpected shut down.
For instance, there is a cabinet maker, who still had a small house in
East Berlin, but had lived for years in West Berlin and had run a flourishing
workshop there with more than ten workers under him; he was there [in
East Berlin] on the night of August 12/13 and has not since returned. Or
there are the students at a technical school who had already sat for part
of their examinations in West Berlin and were staying on that night of
misfortune with their people in East Berlin; they too must now fit into
the planned economy over there. Or there are betrothed couples sepa-
rated by the Wall who can find no means of seeing each other again. All
those who, for the most varied reasons, had not obtained a valid personal
pass for West Berlin, could not go back. 16
Another example of the way in which the action on August 13
totally disrupted the organic life of a human community is pro-
vided by the fate of
musicians, actors, choristers, dancers, ballet dancers, stage hands and
performers who worked in the Eastern Sector, some of them on long-term
contracts, and who had never given up their West Berlin domicile. Owing to
the limited capacity of theatres and orchestras in post-war Berlin, they
found it extremely hard to move to a house in the West. There were about
a thousand of them at the end of August. The East German regime gave
them the alternative, on September 15, either of moving to East Berlin
or of being cut off. To the surprise of the managements, most remained
in West Berlin, often despite decades of connection with their own theatres;
they must now seek other work in West Berlin or in the Federal Republic
of Germany. 17
About 150 scientists who worked in East Berlin institutes, high
schools and academies, many on long-term contracts, live in
West Berlin. Only a few returned to their work in East Berlin
after August 13. Another sad matter concerns the children who
daily used to cross the Sector boundary from East Berlin to attend
schools in West Berlin. Now they can no longer cross. Of these
1,575 children in their first to thirteenth school year, only those
454 who were at West Berlin boarding schools were able to attend
classes there after August 13. For the remainder indoctrination
began in the " socialist " schools of East Berlin and the GDR.
But the worst effect of the Wall is the lost opportunity of
exchanging life in the GDR for life in the Federal Republic.
The denial of this opportunity, it has been observed, depresses
morale :
Many of the most valuable citizens continued living in the Eastern Sector
or in the GDR with the idea that they would be able to go over to West
18 Neue Ziircher Zeitung (Zurich), October 28, 1961.
17 Idem.
34
Approved For Release 2000/08/27 : CIA-RDP78-03061A000100050019-7
 Approved For Release 2000/08/27 : CIA-RDP78-03061A000100050019-7
Berlin on the underground or the tram with what they could carry whenever
existence under the totalitarian system became too intolerable. This
exit has been walled up. The result is resignation and desperation. 19
The Ordinance Restricting Residence. 19
The Acts, Ordinances, Instructions and so on issued since
August 13, 1961, by the authorities of the GDR and East Berlin
do not have the sole function of bringing about the physical and
spiritual isolation of the GDR and East Berlin from the West.
They are no mere defensive measures. The new statutes include
some described as milestones in the development of socialist law.
According to Minister of Justice Hilde Benjamin, it is in this
perspective that the " Ordinance concerning Restriction of Resi-
dence " issued by the Council of Ministers of the GDR on August
24, 1961, has to be seen. This Ordinance authorizes the following
invasions of individual freedom:
a) actual restriction of residence, i.e., preventing a person
from residing in specific places or areas (a form of ex-
pulsion);
b) designation of a specific place of residence (a form of
banishment);
c) the requirement to take particular work;
d) ordering educational labour for persons reluctant to work.
Expulsion and educational labour may be ordered by the courts;
while the requirement to take particular work and banishment may
be ordered by the local authorities. 20 Since the system of dicta-
torship of the proletariat means that all the State organs are
subject to the Party and its instructions, it is of no importance in
legal theory what measures are ordered by what organs.
Expulsion may be either an additional penalty " in the case of
a sentence of imprisonment or of probation ", by Section 1 of
the above Ordinance, or it may be the main penalty. In the latter
case it is decreed " even if no specific criminal law has been vio-
is Idem.
1 For full text of this Ordinance see Apendix C at pp. 49-50.
20 In the first executive regulations issued under the Ordinance concerning
Restriction of Residence of August 24, 1961, the term " local authority "
designates the so-called local popular Assemblies and their Councils, namely
those for the Municipality, the District and the Area; Municipal, District
and Regional Councils are executive authorities.
Approved For Release 2000/08/27 : CIA-RDP78-03061A000100050019-7
 Approved For Release 2000/08/27 : CIA-RDP78-03061A000100050019-7
lated " at the request of the local State organs if the behaviour
of the person convicted " represents a danger to the com-
munity or to individuals or if public security and order are
jeopardized. " 21
If there is a court verdict ordering expulsion, the local authority
may then order banishment and at the same time designate
specific work for the banished person.
The local authority may request the District Court to order
educational labour to deal with persons reluctant to work. Edu-
cational labour is apparently possible as the only penalty. Accord-
ing to standard terminology any person is regarded as reluctant
to work who does not perform " socially valuable work ", in other
words who does not actively participate in building socialism.
Farm workers have been prosecuted as reluctant to work for
saying they wanted a free evening after their eight-hour working
day; they had been promised this leisure in the spring of 1960
campaign for the socialization of agriculture. These were the
grounds used against a cooperative farmer in the Postdam district
who was sentenced to educational labour. Reports in the GDR
21 Expulsion was known as a secondary punishment in the German Cri-
minal Law Code of 1871, which is still in force in both the Federal Republic
and in the GDR, although with numerous and varied amendments. Expulsion
is only used to a limited extent, as demonstrated by the Institute for East
European Law, Munich, in a Chronicle of Legal Development in the Eastern
Bloc, in which the relevant provisions of the German Criminal Code are
compared with the scope of the Ordinance concerning Restriction of Resi-
dence: " Section 38 of the Criminal Code designates police supervision
as an additional sentence supplementing imprisonment. It may be ordered
for a period of up to 5 years when this is specified in the individual provisions
of the Criminal Code. Section 39 states that a criminal placed under
police supervision by the court may be forbidden by the higher police autho-
rities to reside at specific places. Police supervision may be ordered by court
decision: in the case of offences against national defence, against the leaders
in a riot, in the case of mutiny by convicts, in the case of disturbance of the
peace, against leaders of criminal associations, in the case of counterfeit coining,
procuring, distribution of indecent writings, theft or embezzlement, robbery
or blackmail, receiving stolen property, organization of games of chance,
arson, causing a flood, causing damage to transport, or to installations for
protection against water and causing damage by poisoning wells.
Police supervision may therefore only be ordered in very clearly specified
cases and generally only together with a prison sentence.
The introduction by the GDR of new regulations restricting residence
shows clearly that the authorities do not regard the existing provisions concerning
police supervision as sufficient. It may be concluded that the basic feature
of the new Ordinance is that restriction of residence may be ordered without
there being any criminal act, in other words exactly what the notorious OGPU
practised under Stalin."
Approved For Release 2000/08/27 : CIA-RDP78-03061A000100050019-7
 Approved For Release 2000/08/27 : CIA-RDP78-03061A000100050019-7
press 22 show that this form of sentence is carried out in forced
labours camps.
According to the Minister of Justice Hilde Benjamin, it is
intended to include the provisions of the Ordinance concerning
Restriction of Residence in the projected new Criminal Code of
the GDR. She sees the combination of restriction of residence
with educational labour as a " socialist educational measure ".
It has been learned by means of court reports in Neues Deutsch-
land, and in other papers in the GDR that the powers to sentence
contained in the Ordinance concerning Restriction of Residence
have already been applied in numerous cases. A 25 year old
East Berliner, C., was sentenced by the East Berlin Central District
Court for attempting to flee the Republic and for defamation of
the State, to one year's imprisonment to be followed by educational
labour for an indefinite period. 23 On September 7, 1961, the
same court sentenced a 31 year old brewer, Paul Pietruschinski,
to educational labour and expulsion from East Berlin. Although
" healthy and strong ", he had allegedly worked only sporadically
and in most cases not more than a total of five months a year. 24
The Times of London reported a case in Leipzig which ended with
sentences of restriction of residence and educational labour for
20 men and women for criticizing the Government. 25
Increasing Restrictions on Freedom of Expression
The Constitution of the GDR guarantees freedom of speech
and assembly, Article 9 stating:
All citizens have the right, within the limits of universally applicable laws,
to express their opinion freely and publicly and to hold unarmed and peace-
ful assemblies for that purpose. This freedom shall not be restricted by
any service or employment status and no one may be discriminated against
for exercising this right.
There is no press censorship. (Emphasis added.)
In practice there is no such freedom, where it is used in order
to criticize the regime or its policies. A critic of the Communist
system is liable to criminal prosecution under Sections 19 and 20
22 Neues Deutschland (East Berlin), September 8, 1961.
28 Neue Zarcher Zeitung (Zurich), September 9, 1961.
2' Neues Deutschland (East Berlin), September 8, 1961.
21 The Times (London), September 8, 1961.
Approved For Release 2000/08/27 : CIA-RDP78-03061A000100050019-7
 Approved For Release 2000/08/27 : CIA-RDP78-03061A000100050019-7
of the Criminal Law (Amendment) Act of December 11, 1957.
These Sections read as follows :
19. Propaganda and agitation harmful to the State
(1) Any person
1. Glorifying or propagating fascism or militarism or defaming other
peoples and races,
2. Creating discontent against the power of the workers and peasants,
against their organs, against social organizations, or against a citizen
because of his national or social activity or his membership of a national
institution or State organization, assaulting such persons or threatening
them with violence,
shall be subject to imprisonment of not less than three months. An attempt
shall also be punishable.
(2) Any person shall also be punished who distributes writings or other
objects with similar contents or introduces or distributes such objects for
the purpose of hostile agitation.
(3) In serious cases, particularly when such action is performed on the
instructions of the persons or bodies described in Section 14,26 severe
imprisonment shall be ordered.
20. Defamation of the State
Any person
1. publicly slandering or distorting the decisions or activities of national
institutions or social organizations,
2. publicly slandering a citizen for his national or social activity or his
membership of a State institution or social organization,
shall be liable of a prison sentence of up to two years.
Section 20 means, in effect, that anyone who disparages the
Government is liable to a prison sentence.
To give an idea of the criminal justice meted out under the
above-mentioned provisions, two sentences passed in 1958 may
be quoted.
The Gera Area Court sentenced G. Sch., a housewife, to one
year's imprisonment on June 11, 1958, for attacking the funda-
mental social structure of the GDR, thereby agitating in a manner
hostile to the State as covered by Section 19 (2) of the Criminal
Law (Amendment) Act 1957. She was accused of the following
-and of nothing more :
in connection with the measures taken by our Government with regard
to abolishing the remaining rationing provisions and the consequent
26 The " persons or bodies " described in Section 14 are: other States or
their representatives; organizations or groups which combat the workers' and
peasants' power or other peace-loving peoples.
Approved For Release 2000/08/27 : CIA-RDP78-03061A000100050019-7
 Approved For Release 2000/08/27 : CIA-RDP78-03061A000100050019-7
improvement in the living standard of the working population, the accused
when shopping in a food store in B. on May 28, 1958, spoke in the most
shameless manner against the workers' and peasants' power and called
for a strike.
The " most shameless words " she used consisted of statements
that she had been to West Berlin for three days and had had the
opportunity of eating her fill of apricots and bananas. She had
claimed that in the GDR you could not get more than two bananas
and that these were frequently rotten. She was also accused of
having been against the policies of the GDR, as demonstrated by
the fact that when she had been a spectator at a battle exercise
in B. the previous year she had shouted out: " They are shooting
for peace". 27
One H. K. was sentenced on August 20, 1958, by the Bad Lan-
gensalza District Court to 10 months imprisonment for defama-
tion of the State because he had told political jokes in a cafe.
It is not surprising that people are now being very severely
punished if they give vent to their displeasure at the policy of
cordoning off introduced on August 13, 1961. The State-run
press of the GDR and East Berlin has reported numerous prose-
cutions of this sort. The Kyritz District Court sentenced a worker
named Gutschmann to 10 months imprisonment. The prose-
cution stated: " Gutschmann showed himself to be an agent
provocateur, ran down our actions of August 13, and made himself
the spokesman for the capitalists in the Federal Republic. A
sentence of 21/2 years imprisonment was passed on a worker,
R., in September 1961 for criticizing the sealing off action of
August 13, 1961.
Intensification of the Campaign against Freedom of Information
(a) The Written Word
It is generally agreed now that the freedom of expression which
is guaranteed in the Constitution of the GDR, also incorporates
the so-called freedom of information, that is to say the freedom
under Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights
" to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any
27 Dokumente des Unrechis. (Bonn, Federal Republic of Germany, pub-
lished by the Ministry of All-German Affairs), Part IV, p. 197.
28 Der Mitteldeutsche (Bonn, Federal Republic of Germany), 1961, No. 3/5.
Approved For Release 2000/08/27 : CIA-RDP78-03061A000100050019-7
 Approved For Release 2000/08/27 : CIA-RDP78-03061A000100050019-7
media ". The freedom to seek and to receive information and
ideas from the non-Communist world has for years been dras-
tically restricted in the GDR and East Berlin. It is forbidden
to own Western newspapers or periodicals. Distributing Western
publications is an offence liable to prosecution under the Youth
Protection Ordinance of September 15, 1955. This Ordinance
prohibits, justifiably enough, the distribution of indecent literature,
but this conception is taken to cover not only valueless detective
and sex novels, but also any books " contrary to the moral and
political views of the workers ". Adults imperilling the " socialist
consciousness " of young people by distributing such books are
brought to account.
A Mrs. R. C. who ran a lending library in Frankfurt-on-Oder
had 229 books seized and confiscated which were stated to come
under the following headings : " children's literature tainted with
Fascism, colonial literature, anti-Bolshevist books, books from
forbidden publishers, pro-Fascist books, West German books,
undesirable books of poor quality ". These included books by
Gcethe, Theodor Storm, Knut Hamsun, Theodor Plivier, Werner
Bergengruen and the famous children's classic " Heidi " by
Johanna Spyri. The Frankfurt Town Council withdrew with
immediate effect the accused's authorization to operate a lending
library, and to sell books, newspapers and periodicals. The
Frankfurt District Court sentenced her to one year's imprisonment
for violation of the Youth Protection Ordinance. 29
On October 9, 1958, the Municipal Court of the Prenzlauer
Berg district of East Berlin sentenced three cleaning women to a
total of eight months imprisonment for exchanging Western
newspapers and novelettes at their place of work.
(b) Radio and Television Broadcasting
There are special difficulties of a technical nature opposing
efforts to eliminate freedom of information when inhabitants of
the GDR and East Berlin are able to obtain information and
ideas from the West by way of radio and television broadcasts.
Official statistics published on July 1, 1960, said that there were
700,000 television subscribers in the GDR, of whom some 70%
were receiving Western broadcasts. The SED maintains that the
dissatisfaction and opposition shown by the overwhelming major-
29 Dokumente des Unrechts. Op. cit., p. 39 et seq.
Approved For Release 2000/08/27 : CIA-RDP78-03061A000100050019-7
 Approved For Release 2000/08/27 : CIA-RDP78-03061A000100050019-7
ity of the population of the GDR is the fault of Western radio
and television broadcasts. There is so far no valid criminal legis-
lation for the case of the owner of a television set and his family
viewing Western stations. 30 However, it was declared an
offence amounting to anti-state propaganda if the owner of a
radio or television set invited persons outside the immediate
family to listen to programmes. Penalties for this form of anti-
state propaganda have been considerably increased since August
13, 1961. As recently as June 21, 1960, the Potsdam District
Court sentenced a decorator, W. B., guilty of inviting friends to
view Western television programmes and therefore engaging in
anti-state agitation to " only " one year's imprisonment, whereas
five persons were sentenced by the Schwerin Area Court to a
total of 151/2 years imprisonment on August 25, 1961, for the
same offence.
In the meantime the SED has abandoned its policy of relying
mainly on State prohibition against receiving Western radio or
television programmes. It has set its youth association, the Free
German Youth, to suppress such activities, and issued it with the
appropriate " battle orders ". A campaign was announced for
" Lightning action against NATO stations ", with the following
details :
When?
Between September 5 and 9
Where?
In work premises and dwellings
What?
We have three aims:
1. We shall make people realise that anybody listening to a NATO
station is becoming the dupe of the enemies of peace and of the working-
class. We shall animate discussion everywhere and persist with it until
the situation is perfectly clear and until everyone agrees no longer to listen
to NATO stations and to set their aerials instead to the stations of freedom
and socialism.
2. But if people will not see reason we shall climb on to their roofs and
turn their aerials in the proper direction or, if all fails, remove them.
3. We shall also make sure that no fitters put up pivoting aerials in future.
In the workshops responsible for this, class-conscious and skilled members
80 For an example of an arbitrary order of a Municipal Council in this
matter see Appendix D, p. 51.
Approved For Release 2000/08/27 : CIA-RDP78-03061A000100050019-7
 Approved For Release 2000/08/27 : CIA-RDP78-03061A000100050019-7
of our organization will guarantee that the aerials are assembled pro-
perly, for peace, and that all television sets are tuned for the stations
of peace. al
Clearly not everyone encountered was amenable to discussion,
so that the Free German Youth carried out the threatened sanctions
in many cases. During a session of the People's Chamber on
September 20, 1961, a woman Deputy
wearing the blue shirt of the State Youth Organization announced the
formation of women's " order groups " in the factories, to persuade
reluctant workers to maintain their production pledges. This girl proudly
described the work of her group, which had dismantled over 100 television
aerials from roofs and had persuaded many young men to perform honour-
able service in the national armed forces. 12 (Emphasis added.)
Television aerials were also destroyed.
The resulting infringements of the rights of the individual and
the damage caused by such illegal actions ordered by the SED
remain unpunished. Where an activity is adjudged by the Party
to be expedient then such activity is not contrary to the law. A
claim for compensation against an SED member in respect of
destruction of a radio set was rejected by the Potsdam District
Court on January 15, 1959, in the following terms :
It is perfectly clear that the plaintiff suffered damage to his property.
The defendant deliberately broke the plaintiff's portable radio.
However, it has also to be considered whether the defendant's action was
contrary to law or whether he was entitled to perform this action. The
court believes that the action of the defendant was not contrary to law.
In accordance with Section 228 of the Civil Code it is not an action
contrary to the law if another person's property is damaged or destroyed
in order to protect oneself or others against the threat of danger from
that object.
It may be proved that the plaintiff played his radio so loud that other
passers-by could hear the inflammatory comments made from RIAS. as
In this way he was guilty of spreading subversive propaganda against our
State. Playing such programmes in the street is a danger for our Republic.
This danger the defendant countered with his action. Therefore it was
essential to damage or destroy the radio since the plaintiff had already
showed in the preceding discussion that he would not be persuaded to
turn off his radio.
31 Junge Welt (East Berlin), September 5, 1961; this is the official paper
of the central council of the Free German Youth.
82 Neue Ziircher Zeitung, (Zurich), September 21, 1961.
sa Radio in the American Sector.
Approved For Release 2000/08/27 : CIA-RDP78-03061A000100050019-7
 Approved For Release 2000/08/27 : CIA-RDP78-03061A000100050019-7
A typical example of the way in which the impunity of politically
desirable breaches of the law is justified is provided by the
following considerations expressed by the Supreme Court of the
GDR when it acquitted an SED official in December, 1959, who
had hit a man who farmed on his own over the head with a
pitchfork after a political argument:
If a person who has provoked another has been injured as a result of
politically justified refutation of his anti-democratic remarks, there is no
punishable offence since there are no harmful consequences for the German
Democratic Republic, for socialist construction and for the interests of
the workers. The person guilty of such remarks is himself answerable
for any damage arising therefrom.
The actions by the Free German Youth against reception of
Western stations and the acquittal of their members of all conse-
quences of any illegal acts serve as impressive illustration for the
great range of coercive action open to a dictatorship of the prole-
tariat such as the GDR. In a dictatorship of the proletariat it
is not the State authorities in the traditional meaning of the word,
namely the powers named in the Constitution, that exercise
supreme power. The highest power above every other authority
in the national field is the Communist Party, or its executive
organs. To describe this particular form of State, Lenin used the
metaphor of motive force, transmission belts and levers. The
levers and the transmission belts are represented by the trade
unions, the Soviets (i.e., the State authorities), the cooperatives and
the Communist Youth League. The motive power is the Com-
munist Party, which means the SED in the GDR. According to
the terminology of the statutes of the Communist Party of the
Soviet Union, trade unions, Soviets, cooperatives, etc. come under
the common heading of " organizations outside the Party ". In
order to pursue its national or social aims, a Communist Party
uses that " organization outside the party " which it regards as
suitable for a given purpose. The only thing to ensure is that
the one should not burden or thwart the activity of the other,
for instance that the courts do not make those responsible for an
action commanded by the Party answerable in civil and/or criminal
law for any damage incurred in the course of such action. As
shown above, this danger is in practice entirely avoided.
Approved For Release 2000/08/27 : CIA-RDP78-03061A000100050019-7
 Approved For Release 2000/08/27 : CIA-RDP78-03061A000100050019-7
In response to a letter from the Mayor of Berlin to the Congress
for Cultural Freedom, thirty authors of world repute signed a
declaration dated August 29, 1961, containing the following passage :
" It is one thing for a social order to force its citizens, by the
millions, to seek asylum elsewhere. It is still more reprehensible
to cut off their escape by means of walls and barbed wire across
city streets, to threaten them at the point of bayonets, to shoot
at them in flight as if they were runaway slaves.
" This is not a matter of politics or ideology or of social phil-
osophy. It is a matter of the most elementary respect for a human
right-and one which all the nationals of the civilized world are
on record as having recognized. The Universal Declaration of
Human Rights, which was adopted by the General Assembly
of the United Nations, states this right unequivocally (Clause 13,
paragraph 2) : ` Everyone has the right to leave any country,
including his own . . . ' "
Even the Constitution of the GDR embodies the guarantee:
" Every citizen is entitled to emigrate " (Article 10, Section 3).
But the undermining of this right began long before the building
of the Wall. The introduction of obligatory possession of a
passport and visa is compatible with freedom of exit and emigration
only if the citizen is given legal entitlement to the issue of a passport
and the granting of an exit permit. For citizens of the GDR
and East Berliners no such entitlement is provided under the
Passport Act of 1954. Also irreconcilable with freedom of exit
and emigration are the heavy penalties laid down by the Passport
(Amendment) Act of 1957 for fleeing the Republic and by the
Criminal Law (Amendment) Act of the same year for the crime
of false proselytism. The fact that, inside the control strip, the
police are authorized to fire on escapees from the Republic is even
less compatible with this elementary freedom. The measures
taken after August 13, 1961 by the GDR regime to prevent
flight from the Republic have completely vitiated the freedom
of exit and emigration which are themselves guaranteed under
the Constitution.
44
Approved For Release 2000/08/27 : CIA-RDP78-03061A000100050019-7
 Approved For Release 2000/08/27 : CIA-RDP78-03061A000100050019-7
Apart from freedom of exit and emigration, the measures
taken by the GDR Government from August 13, 1961 onward
have encroached extensively on other basic rights, namely personal
liberty and freedom of movement, i.e., " the right to take up
residence at any place ", both guaranteed under Article 8 of the
Constitution of the GDR. Such was the effect, in particular,
of the promulgation of the Ordinance of August 24, 1961 concern-
ing Restriction of Residence which vests either the courts or the
administrative authorities with the power to order expulsion,
banishment and compulsory labour, even in the case of persons
who have committed no criminal action. It is sufficient that the
measure taken be deemed by the body concerned to be " in the
interest of the community or of the individual or that " " public
security and order are endangered ". Under the same Ordinance
persons considered to be work-shy can be committed to educational
labour. The statement by the Minister of Justice, Hilde Benja-
min, that the provisions of the Ordinance represent " milestones
in the development of socialist law " cannot disguise the fact
that the new legislation is contrary to basic principles of law.
Court decisions and administrative practice make this quite clear.
One need only recall the case of the cooperative farmer from
Potsdam who was sentenced to educational labour for being
" work-shy " because, after his eight-hour working day, he claimed
the evening free. Free evenings after work had been promised to
the farmers during the campaign to socialize agriculture in the
Spring of 1960. There can hardly be any doubt that the Ordinance
concerning Restrictions of Residence can provide the "legal" basis
for internment measures similar to those which had the effect
of filling the Soviet labour camps in Stalin's time.
In the Resolution adopted by the Warsaw Pact States, published
on August 13, 1961, it was stated that their Governments naturally
understood " that the introduction of protective measures on the
border of West Berlin will create a certain degree of inconvenience
for the population ". Masters of the art of euphemism can put
it thus, particularly when the victims of the " protective measures "
cannot be freely heard. It has been shown that Sections 19 and
20 of the Criminal Law (Amendment) Act of 1957 (propaganda
and agitation harmful to the State; defamation of the State)
provide for the imposition of penalities for any criticism of the
regime or its policies. The courts have applied these provisions
in their full rigour against persons who expressed their displeasure
at the " inconvenience " of the Wall and other sealing-off measures.
Approved For Release 2000/08/27 : CIA-RDP78-03061A000100050019-7
 Approved For Release 2000/08/27 : CIA-RDP78-03061A000100050019-7
Article 9 of the Constitution of the GDR does indeed state
that " all citizens have the right within the limits of universally
applicable laws to express their opinions freely and publicly "
and freedom of opinion is in fact one of the most basic civil
rights in a democracy. This freedom enables and protects the
formation and expression of a national will; respect for this will in
the formulation of state policy is the hallmark of a democracy.
Correctly interpreted, freedom to express opinions does therefore
also embrace the right to criticize the regime and its administration.
The position in the GDR is, however, different; there the right
to free expression of opinion is identical with the citizen's duty
to remain silent.
The restrictions on the right of free speech are accompanied
by restrictions on the right to listen. The measures limiting per-
sonal liberty, freedom to move from country to country and within
the national territory, and freedom of opinion, were consequently
accompanied by an even greater restriction on freedom of infor-
mation, i.e. the right " to seek and receive information and ideas
from all sources ". The citizen of the GDR was to be protected
body and soul against any intellectual contact with the free world.
Of the measures taken under this heading the most striking was
the action entrusted to the Free German Youth against technical
installations for the reception of Western radio and television
programmes. Television aerials, in particular, were dismantled
manu iuventutis.
The Wall that prevents the citizens of the GDR and East
Berlin from choosing freedom can not conceal the injustice
perpetrated behind it. Its construction through the heart of
the city has neither legal nor moral justification.
46
Approved For Release 2000/08/27 : CIA-RDP78-03061A000100050019-7
 Approved For Release 2000/08/27 : CIA-RDP78-03061A000100050019-7
APPENDIX A
Announcement by the Municipal Council of East Berlin *
In accordance with the decision of the Council of Ministers of
the German Democratic Republic of August 12, 1961, citizens of
Democratic Berlin shall no longer engage in any occupational
activity in West Berlin.
The Municipal Council calls on all citizens of Democratic
Berlin previously employed in West Berlin either to apply to their
last place of work in Democratic Berlin to resume employment
there or to register with their local employment office with a view
to obtaining suitable work.
Berlin, August 12, 1961. The Municipal Council of
Greater Berlin
EBERT
Mayor
* From Neues Deutschland (East Berlin), August 13, 1961.
Approved For Release 2000/08/27 : CIA-RDP78-03061A000100050019-7
 Approved For Release 2000/08/27 : CIA-RDP78-03061A000100050019-7
APPENDIX B
Announcement by the Municipal Council of East Berlin *
The Municipal Council of the capital of the GDR issues the
following announcement concerning registration of school chil-
dren, apprentices and students who have hitherto pursued their
studies in West Berlin.
1. Citizens of the capital of the German Democratic Republic
(Democratic Berlin) whose children have hitherto studied at a
school in West Berlin are hereby instructed to register with the
competent office of the local branch of the People's Municipal
Education Authority, for schools to be allocated to their children.
2. Apprentices who have hitherto been apprenticed in West
Berlin shall register with the competent office of the local branch
of the People's Municipal Education Authority, with a view to
entering a training course.
3. Students and technical students who have previously pursued
their studies at a university or technical or professional college in
West Berlin shall register with the competent office of the local
branch of the People's Municipal Education Authority.
4. The registrations ordered in paragraphs I to 3 shall be made
by August 26.
Berlin, August 19, 1961 The Municipal Council of
Greater Berlin
LENGSFELD
Municipal Councillor
From Neues Deutschland (East Berlin), August 21, 1961.
Approved For Release 2000/08/27 : CIA-RDP78-03061A000100050019-7
 Approved For Release 2000/08/27 : CIA-RDP78-03061A000100050019-7
Ordinance concerning Restriction of Residence *
In accordance with a decision by the People's Chamber of the
German Democratic Republic of August 11, 1961, the Government
of the German Democratic Republic hereby decrees the following:
Section 1
(1) In the case of a sentence to imprisonment or probation
the court may also order restriction of residence for the person
sentenced.
(2) Restriction of residence may be ordered if it is in the interest
of the community or of the individual that the person should be
restrained from visiting particular places or regions or if public
security and order is endangered.
Section 2
By restriction of residence the person sentenced is forbidden to
reside in specific places in the German Democratic Republic. The
organs of the Executive are empowered in accordance with such
a sentence to require the person thus sentenced to reside in specific
places or regions. They may also require the person sentenced
to take up specific work.
Section 3
(1) At the request of the local authority, restriction of residence
may be imposed by decision of the District Court even if no specific
criminal law has been violated, provided that the person's behav-
iour represents a danger to the community or to individuals or
if public security and order are jeopardized. In such cases Section
2 of this Ordinance shall apply.
(2) At the request of the local authorities educational labour
may be ordered for persons reluctant to work.
(3) The provisions of the criminal procedure shall be applied
accordingly.
* From Gesetzblatt der Deutschen Demokratischen Republik (East Berlin),
August 25, 1961, No. 55.
Approved For Release 2000/08/27 : CIA-RDP78-03061A000100050019-7
 Approved For Release 2000/08/27 : CIA-RDP78-03061A000100050019-7
Section 4
(1) Should the sentenced person resist the restriction of resid-
ence or the order to work, any probationary period shall be
cancelled.
(2) Should restriction of residence directly follow a prison
sentence or if it is ordered independently, violation of restriction
of residence or of the order to work shall be punished by impri-
sonment.
Section 5
Property rights shall not be affected by restriction of residence.
Section 6 r
Executive instructions shall be issued by the Minister of the
Interior and the Minister of Justice.
Section 7
This Ordinance shall come into force on August 25, 1961.
Berlin, August 24, 1961.
The Council of Ministers of the German Democratic Republic
The Minister of Justice
STOPH Dr. BENJAMIN
Deputy Chairman of the Council
of Ministers
50
Approved For Release 2000/08/27 : CIA-RDP78-03061A000100050019-7
 Approved For Release 2000/08/27 : CIA-RDP78-03061A000100050019-7
APPENDIX D
Order of Pritzwalk Municipal Council Prohibiting All Reception
of Western Broadcasts
1. All citizens of the district town of Pritzwalk are instructed
immediately to refrain from receiving broadcasts from West
German and West Berlin radio or television transmitting stations.
2. Aerials shall be immediately set to receive the radio and
television transmitters of the German Democratic Radio.
3. Previous measures are confirmed by this decision.
4. Violations of this decision shall be prosecuted according to
the legal provisions in force. In serious cases radio or television
licences may be withdrawn. It may also be decided to confiscate
the sets.
This Order of August 13, 1961, is arbitrary because it purports to
invoke non-existent legal provisions in an attempt to intimidate the
population.
Approved For Release 2000/08/27 : CIA-RDP78-03061A000100050019-7
 Approved For Release 2000/08/27 : CIA-RDP78-03061A000100050019-7
APPENDIX E
The following two excerpts from the press of the German
Democratic Republic illustrate punishments recently meted out
to those indulging in " agitation harmful to the State " and " work
dodging ".
POISON MARIA AND MISPLACED FRIENDSHIP
or:
WHAT HAPPENS IF YOU LISTEN TO THE ENEMY
An extraordinary works meeting held at the Dewag publicity firm, Fotodia,
Dresden, was particularly well attended. The judge, the magistrates and the
public prosecutor of the Northern District Court had come to speak to an
audience composed mostly of young women and girls in order to explain
a trial which concerned them all and had lessons for everyone.
56 year old Maria Rieger had worked in the firm for several years and lived
at Dresden A 19. Following the measures of August 13, she defamed our
workers' and peasants' State in a shocking manner and wished a ruined harvest
on all the citizens of the GDR. The above-mentioned discussion showed
where her putrid thoughts led to. She listened to West Zone inflammatory
broadcasts eagerly and took her information from Western newspapers that
she got from her sister in Bavaria. She even lent some of these to other
women at work and for the past year had been injecting this poison first of
all in small doses by constant cunning remarks among the other members
of her brigade. At the same time she was very well off in this State which
she was running down. Together with her husband she owned a new house
and she had a savings account of about 10,000 DM.
Quite rightly, some of her workmates stood up at this meeting and de-
manded an explanation from the brigade and the brigade leader as to how
this open agitation could have occurred. " We discuss all our problems
together. In the case of this member we should have shown up such unclear
thinking at the first signs ", demanded brigade members from the paint shop
and the photographic section.
Further discussion then showed the weak points in the collective and gave
an instructive example of where misunderstood friendship at work. can lead
to. The brigade leader now admitted: " Yes, indeed, I should have given
her a good talking to ". But nothing had happened, although everyone in
the brigade knew full well that Maria Rieger listened to inflammatory broad-
casts and constantly ran down our State. " We didn't take her seriously ! "
" We had got used to her moanings. " And so they left Maria Rieger in peace
until one of her workmates had a basinful and, conscious of her duty, no
longer concealed these permanent complaints.
* From Slichsische Zeitung (Dresden), September 6, 1961.
Approved For Release 2000/08/27 : CIA-RDP78-03061A000100050019-7
 Approved For Release 2000/08/27 : CIA-RDP78-03061A000100050019-7
Poison Maria will now have a year in jail, isolated from the hostile insinua-
tions of Western propaganda, in order to reflect on her shameful behaviour
and draw conclusions about her future. The members of her brigade,
however, should also get together for an open and honest discussion, learning
from the results of where their indifference would have led.
In these days in which our Republic has won a victory for peace, we have
all grown in stature. The comrades have closed their ranks. New fighters
have entered the party. Waverers have come to realize the true situation and
have joined the forces of peace. While our national People's Army and the
combat groups keep a watch for peace on the borders with West Berlin, the
workers are demonstrating their loyalty to the GDR with new production
successes. Many brigade diaries contain reports on the major and minor heroic
deeds of these days, such as that of the Scholz brigade in the Coswig pre-stressed
concrete pillar works, from which we shall publish extracts in the next few days.
Ruthenberg has been in our brigade since June 6. He was sent to our
works to gain practical information for a new plant. " This 20-year old was
a pain in the neck right from the start ", foreman Scholz remarked. " He
made himself out to be a great ladies' man, he shunned the collective and he
was as work-shy as they come. "
" We could see he was Western-inclined ", added our Party organizer,
Bruno Hoffmann, " but the balloon went up on August 14. "
What happened at our works on August 14?
Ruthenberg had dodged work on August 9 and 10, and was reported to
have travelled home on August 11. Then he suddenly turned up again on
Monday, August 14. During the mid-morning break, when group organizer
Hoffmann was explaining to our brigade our Government's protective mea-
sures, Ruthenberg thought the right moment had come. He provoked us
with cheeky taunts: " Tell me why tanks have to take up position in Berlin,
if it's true that we are in favour of peace?" Then he thought he would play
his trump card. He said he had been to Berlin on Sunday. He told us
frightful stories and Bruno Hoffmann answered him sharply. But not all
of our fellow brigade members knew that Ruthenberg was playing with marked
cards.
Some of the politically inexperienced youngsters such as Christa Wendisch,
Jurgen Goldhahn and Jochen Schulze were almost ready to believe the siren
song of this card-sharper. After the meeting Ruthenberg continued his
attempts to sell his propaganda, but he was in for a disappointment.
Our colleagues had looked things over in the meantime. At a second
meeting that same day they analyzed Ruthenberg very thoroughly.
Wegner set the ball rolling: " How come you turn up again after sloping
off for several days? "
Ruthenberg tried to worm his way out. He said he had been at his uncle's
in West Berlin.
Comrade Schabitz: " And what did you want in West Berlin? " Now
Ruthenberg was trapped and he had to own up. Ruthenberg had already
Approved For Release 2000/08/27 : CIA-RDP78-03061A000100050019-7
 Approved For Release 2000/08/27 : CIA-RDP78-03061A000100050019-7
betrayed our Republic once before. His father had also been arrested for
similar offences while on " State leave " as Ruthenberg put it in his thieves'
cant. The agent provocateur gave himself away time and time again. He
said that he and a group of other rowdies, spurred on by the West Berlin
front-line bosses, would have liked to attack our tanks.
Other colleagues such as Emil Winter who had previously looked on
Ruthenberg's talk as mere wind now realized how dangerous this scoundrel
was. We were itching to put a-real worker's fist under this individual's chin.
The discussion lasted a good four hours and by the end Ruthenberg's
trickery was out. The unanimous decision of our brigade: "Ruthenberg is
a traitor. " " There is no place for such elements in our brigade. " " This
is a job for the public prosecutor ".
And he did do his job. Two and a half years " in the cooler " was the
sentence. " Hardly enough ", our veteran brigade member Hans Haufe
averred. " But we forgot to do one thing. We should have given him a
damn good booting up the arse. That would have pleased this lout and his
bosses to see us stand and beg for a loaf of bread at the West Berlin border.
Our Government was dead right to send something solid there, and that
means tanks. And it's dead right that this rotten egg Ruthenberg is now
where he belongs. "
Approved For Release 2000/08/27 : CIA-RDP78-03061A000100050019-7
 Approved For Release 2000/08/27 : CIA-RDP78-03061A000100050019-7
Approved For Release 2000/08/27: CFA--RDP 1 000100050019-7