STÁTNÍ TAJEMNÍK U ŘÍŠSKÉHO PROTEKTORA V ČECHÁCH A NA MORAVĚ, PRAHA, inv. 2631, sig. 109-12/279 (poškozeno) Page 6 · 6 of 49
STATE SECRETARY FOR THE RUSSIAN PROTECTOR IN THINGS AND IN MORAVA, PRAGUE, inv. 2631, sig. 109-12/279 (damaged)
English Translation
Y0) , The application of this principle to state police measures proved to be a dangerous obstacle to the internal security of the empire soon after the takeover of power. It led to consequences, which were incompatible with the task of the secret state police to protect the newly created National Socialist state against its internal enemies and to undermine any attempt to work against this state by any means. Therefore, the administrative jurisdiction as a control measure against state police measures soon became problematic. Some countries drew legislative conclusions from this. 1. Saxony. As the first country, Saxony expressly exempts the most important governmental orders from the administrative judicial review. By means of the law amending the law on administrative administration of the 14th century. 12.33 the administrative dispute proceedings were excluded "against police orders under the decree of the Reichspräsident for the protection of the people and the state of 28.II.1933 (RGBl.I., p.83) or on the basis of the provisions for this purpose." 1) 2. Prussia. In Prussia, the first comprehensive legal regulation of the position of the secret state police of 30.11.33, through which the secret State police were organized into an independent branch of the internal administration with independent authorities, had already had an indirect effect on the administrative control of their measures. Until then, the Prussian secret state police, like the former political police, formed part of the general state police administration, i.e. it still constituted a, albeit organizationally strong 1) § 75 para.1 no.20 of the Saxon administrative law administration set as amended by § 2 of the Act amending the Administrative Law Care Act of 14.12.33 (GBl.S. 194); see also Sächs.OvG.v.14.9.1934,Sächts.Jahrb.Bd.39 p.63 = JW.1934; S.3327= Rverwb1.1935; Sähs.OVG.in Rvervbl.1933, p.718,Fischers Zeitschr.Wd.72 .Ak.Zschr.1938, p.64. 70415