What if: A Nazi Constitution?

In OTL, the Weimar constitution was never repealed or replaced. The only black letter legal bases for the Nazi regime were the emergency powers provisions in the Weimar constitution, and the "Enabling Act" of 1934, and the only thing approaching a Nazi law code were the Nuremberg Decrees. Even the institution of Deutsch Volksgesetz or "German Common Law" had no actual concrete legal definition.

The question is fourfold:

1: Aside from the obvious answer that it would be written in German on paper or parchment, what would a Nazi Constitution, as instituted between 1933 and 1935 look like?

2: What would a comprehensive National Socialist law code and legal system look like?

3: How would these things affect the preperations and prosecution of World War II?

4: How would these documents, and the artifacts of their institution affect De-Nazification, assuming that the Axis loses?

Inquiring minds want to know!
 
I'm certain that Hans Frank (aka: the lawyer) would be the architect of the Nazi constitution, though Hitler would have just dismissed it as nothing more than rubber stamp.
 

MSZ

Banned
A Nazi constitution would make Germany a unitarian state, divided into numerous Gaue led by Gauleiters responsible only before the Chancellor holding dictatorial powers (if an office of the President would exist, its powers would be minimal). The Fuhrerprinzip would apply to all levels of governmental administration, making a strongly centralized structure as nobody would have any guarantees about their position, it being possible to be revoked at a whim. The NSDAP would be the only legal party obviously, membership being required to assume political office. The Reichstag would mostly be an entity meant to create legal acts (not laws, or at least not so many of them) and have a subservient role to the executive branch.

The Volksgesetzbuch (Nazi Civil Code) was planned and reforms to the Strafgesetzbuch (penal code) were implemented. It included a lot of racial legislation, particularly in marriage and succession law - only Aryans having full legal capacity, being allowed to marry other Aryans, Aryan children having greater rights to inheritance, the possibility of dividing ones wealth in a last will being severly limited. The penal code was also to differentiate the penalty comitted by and against citizens and "people belonging to the state" (don't remember the term used - but essentially non-aryans living in Germany without citizenship, but not immigrants either, the Nazis intended to grant different status to different types of inhabitants, citizenship being the highest honor) with those done against Aryans being punished more severely.

Also, judges were to have much greater power, so far that they were allowed to punish non-existant crimes on the basis of analogy with other crimes, or by simply thinking it be "punishable", even those commited in the past when the deed done wasn't criminal at the time of its doing. They were also not to be impartial of course - fascism not being big on the "division of powers" concept.

Some of these reforms might make the German war effort better, as it might solve a lot of the administrative difficulties they faced OTL. On the other hand, if done poorly, they could make it worse - not all types of order are beneficial after all. But since the Nazis hardly ever bothered with respecting any laws at all, making new ones would change their actions in any way.
 
The problem here is that the Nazis had no interest in establishing a full legal system. At least the starting point if the movement began to do this would be the original Nazi Party platform.

1) The closest equivalent is the Soviet constitution as a model for how the constitution of a totalitarian party-state would work in practice. The Nazi one may be more explicitly ideological than the Mk. I and Mk. II Soviet constitutions were, however. It may also include some Orwellian guarantees never, ever going to be fulfilled like the USSR's mandate of freedom of speech, assembly, association, and so on.

2) Again to judge by the Soviet example the Party and Party law would be triumphant over all, and law would be evaluated on an ideological basis. In all probability a lot of the elements of the Nazi murder apparatus will be given explicit legal sanctions by rigidly defining concepts like life and liberty.

3) They simply legalize a lot of the extralegal actions of OTL but otherwise there is no change, not least because the Hossbach Memorandum ITTL will see the same process behind it as occurred IOTL.

4) They complicate it immensely in the West, the Soviets delete much of the "National Socialist" verbiage, replace with "Communist Party", obliterate death camps and have a ready-made legal apparatus to use to repress any sign of independence in East Germany.
 
1) The closest equivalent is the Soviet constitution as a model for how the constitution of a totalitarian party-state would work in practice. The Nazi one may be more explicitly ideological than the Mk. I and Mk. II Soviet constitutions were, however. It may also include some Orwellian guarantees never, ever going to be fulfilled like the USSR's mandate of freedom of speech, assembly, association, and so on.
I don't think so. Nazism was a lot clearer than Communism about guaranteeing no individual rights and everything being for the service of the state/community/race. A National Socialist Constitution, I think, would be a lot closer to practice than the Soviet Constitution was.
 
Isn't the very idea of a Constitution (one of the great things the Enlightenment gave us) in opposition to the very Unenlightened Nazis?
 
Isn't the very idea of a Constitution (one of the great things the Enlightenment gave us) in opposition to the very Unenlightened Nazis?

No, because a Constitution is simply a framework for government. The fact that many Constitutions promise rights and freedoms doesn't make such necessary to the concept of a Constitution.
 

Cook

Banned
Isn't the very idea of a Constitution (one of the great things the Enlightenment gave us) in opposition to the very Unenlightened Nazis?
I’m inclined to agree. The Nazis were constantly emphasising the violently revolutionary nature of National Socialism, any legal framework that couldn’t be put aside or ignored when it suited them would have been an anathema to them.
 
I’m inclined to agree. The Nazis were constantly emphasising the violently revolutionary nature of National Socialism, any legal framework that couldn’t be put aside or ignored when it suited them would have been an anathema to them.

If Hitler decided that a constitution was needed for some reason or other he would have it written such that the Fueher by definition was above it. It would be up to the Fueher himself to rule whether he is obeying it or not.
 
Hitler very deliberately didn’t assume the office of president because he didn’t want to take an oath upholding the constitution.

That would be the constitution that was in effect at the time. If he decided a new one was needed that one would be in effect and the old one scrapped. Because of the Fuhrer Principal he wouldn't even have to pretend it was democratic and it would restrict him in no way. It is a long-shot I agree but that is what the OP wanted.
 
It's been held that Hitler admired much about Britain, so perhaps he would base any constitution on an aspect of the British constitution ... an unwritten constitution.
 
A Constitution is based on institutions. Nazi Germany was based heavily on the individula Fuher.

Unles it were written on the asumption that the monster was imortal it would need a means of a new dicator emerging after Schilelgruber's death
 
Hitler did have plans to restrict the franchise (meaningless as it was) to male citizens who'd completed their military service and female citizens who married/had children (all in accordance with Nazi breeding laws). Nazi ideology aside women probally wouldn't be de jure banned from holding public office just in case the Reich needed to honour a widwow or something.
 
Top