[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"detail-sidebar-cat-0-en-105":3,"doc-seo-181570-105":59,"doc-detail-181570-en":130},{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":6},0,"success",[7,13,18,23,28,33,38,43,48,51,55],{"id":8,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":10,"show_sort_weight":11,"slug":12},1,"Document","Story & Novel",90,"story-novel",{"id":14,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":15,"show_sort_weight":16,"slug":17},2,"Literature",80,"literature",{"id":19,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":20,"show_sort_weight":21,"slug":22},4,"Exam",70,"exam",{"id":24,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":25,"show_sort_weight":26,"slug":27},5,"Comic",60,"comic",{"id":29,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":30,"show_sort_weight":31,"slug":32},6,"Technology",50,"technology",{"id":34,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":35,"show_sort_weight":36,"slug":37},7,"Healthcare",40,"healthcare",{"id":39,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":40,"show_sort_weight":41,"slug":42},8,"Research & Report",30,"research-report",{"id":44,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":45,"show_sort_weight":46,"slug":47},9,"Religion & Spirituality",20,"religion-spirituality",{"id":46,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":49,"show_sort_weight":46,"slug":50},"World Cup","world-cup",{"id":52,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":53,"show_sort_weight":52,"slug":54},10,"Lifestyle","lifestyle",{"id":56,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":57,"show_sort_weight":24,"slug":58},19,"General","general",{"code":4,"msg":60,"data":61},"ok",{"site_id":62,"language":63,"slug":64,"title":65,"keywords":66,"description":67,"schema_data":68,"social_meta":123,"head_meta":125,"extra_data":127,"updated_unix":129},105,"en","the-german-border-guardcases-and-international-humanrights","The German Border GuardCases and International HumanRights","","After German reunification on 3 October 1990, courts adjudicated homicide charges against GDR border guards who killed fugitives attempting to escape across the Berlin Wall or the border between East and West Germany. The Unification Treaty governed which criminal law applied, prompting defendants to rely on GDR law as justification. The article explains how international human rights arguments were introduced to claim the GDR rules had to yield to a higher norm, and reviews the Federal Constitutional Court’s treatment of ex post facto law concerns.",{"@graph":69,"@context":122},[70,84,105],{"@type":71,"itemListElement":72},"BreadcrumbList",[73,77,79,82],{"item":74,"name":75,"@type":76,"position":8},"https://docshare.wps.com","Home","ListItem",{"item":78,"name":9,"@type":76,"position":14},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/",{"item":80,"name":40,"@type":76,"position":81},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/research-report/",3,{"item":83,"name":65,"@type":76,"position":19},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/the-german-border-guardcases-and-international-humanrights/181570/",{"url":83,"name":65,"@type":85,"image":86,"author":91,"headline":65,"publisher":94,"fileFormat":97,"inLanguage":63,"description":67,"dateModified":98,"datePublished":99,"encodingFormat":97,"isAccessibleForFree":100,"interactionStatistic":101},"DigitalDocument",{"url":87,"@type":88,"width":89,"height":90},"https://docshare.wps.com/thumbnails/the-german-border-guardcases-and-international-humanrights/181570.png","ImageObject",300,407,{"name":92,"@type":93},"Cipher","Person",{"url":74,"name":95,"@type":96},"DocShare","Organization","application/pdf","2026-10-19","2026-09-02",true,{"@type":102,"interactionType":103,"userInteractionCount":46},"InteractionCounter",{"@type":104},"ViewAction",{"@type":106,"mainEntity":107},"FAQPage",[108,114,118],{"name":109,"@type":110,"acceptedAnswer":111},"What legal framework did German courts apply after reunification for crimes committed in GDR territory?","Question",{"text":112,"@type":113},"The Unification Treaty required applying the GDR criminal law to acts committed in GDR territory before unification, unless the Federal Republic’s law was more favourable to the defendant.","Answer",{"name":115,"@type":110,"acceptedAnswer":116},"What was the core defence raised by border guard defendants in these cases?",{"text":117,"@type":113},"Defendants argued that GDR law had provided justification for their conduct, so their actions were lawful and should not be treated as criminal.",{"name":119,"@type":110,"acceptedAnswer":120},"How did international human rights feature in the courts’ reasoning?",{"text":121,"@type":113},"The courts used international human rights standards to argue that the GDR laws should yield to a higher legal norm, and they discussed ex post facto issues addressed by the Federal Constitutional Court.","https://schema.org",{"og:url":83,"og:type":124,"og:title":65,"og:site_name":95,"og:description":67},"article",{"robots":126,"canonical":83},"index,follow",{"doc_id":128,"site_id":62},181570,1788345175,{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":131},{"doc_id":128,"user_id":132,"nickname":92,"user_avatar":133,"doc_module":4,"category_id":39,"category_name":40,"doc_title":65,"doc_description":67,"doc_content":134,"file_id":135,"file_url":136,"file_type":137,"file_size":138,"view_count":46,"is_deleted":4,"is_public":8,"is_downloadable":8,"audit_status":8,"page_count":52,"language":139,"language_code":63,"site_id":62,"html_lang":63,"table_of_contents":140,"faqs":141,"seo_title":142,"seo_description":67,"update_tm":129,"read_time":143,"preview_page_count":4},687208528416,"https://ap-avatar.wpscdn.com/davatar_9964176cb1d06d4a9deccf72a44ae3dc","…                                              …                                     …  \n# The German Border GuardCases and International HumanRights\n\nRudolf Geiger*  \n## Abstract\n\nAfter the reunification of Germany on 3 October 1990 the German courts were required todeal with charges of homicide against GDR border guards who had killed fugitives trying toescape over the Berlin Wall or across the border separating East from West Germany.According to the Unification Treaty,the law relevant to crimes committed on GDR territoryprior to the date ofunification was the criminal law of the GDR,unless the law of the FederalRepublic of Germany was more favourable to the defendant.Thus,defendants invoked GDRlaw to establish that their actions had been lawful and could not be held to be criminal.Thisarticle demonstrates how international human rights were brought into play by the courts inarguing that the laws of the GDR had to yield to a higherlaw.It also refers to the reasoning ofthe Federal Constitutional Court when it addressed the question ofex post facto laws.Therethe Court's arguments remained exclusively within the sphere ofGerman constitutionallaw.It is contended that the Court's reasoning would have been more convincing had it also takeninto account in this instance the relevant provisions of international human rightsinstruments.  \n## 1 Introduction\n\nThe reunificatlon of Germany,which came about through the accession of theGerman Democratic Republic(GDR)to the Federal Republic of Germany on 3 October1990,'entailed specificlegal problems that were posedby the continuing effects of thedefunct socialist regime.In order to resolve these problems,the annexes to theUnification Treaty contain,inter alia,elaborate lists of rules which modify the entryinto force of the laws of the Federal Republic in the territory of the former GDR.  \n·Professor of Law.University of Leiprig.Otto-Schill-Strasse 2.D-04109 Lelpzig.Germany.Treaty between the Pederal Republic of Germany and the German Democrattc Republic on theEstabllshment of German Unlty('Untfication Treaty')of 31 August 1990:English versłon in 30 LM(1991)457.  \nEuropean Jourmal ofIntemational Law 9(1998),540-549  \nIn criminal matters the Unification Treaty provided that the law applicable to actscommitted in GDR territory prior to the date of unification continued to be thecriminal law of the GDR,unless in individual cases the criminal law of the FederalRepublic was more favourable to the defendant.²This approach did not create anysubstantial problems in cases of 'ordinary'crimes,such as theft,robbery or murdercommitted by private persons.But the situation proved to be quite different for cases ofso-called‘government criminality',where GDR officials or soldiers committed actsthat were held to be lawful or were even legally required in the GDR legal system aspractised at that time but were considered serious crimes in West German law.  \nAn important example of such government criminality came to light with theborder guard cases.In these cases the courts were required to deal with the objectionsput forward by defendants that GDR law had indeed provided justification for theiractions and that it should consequently be applied in their cases.In dealing with theseobjections,the courts,inter alia,referred to the infringement of international humanrights by the GDR practices.In this way,they made use of new ways in whichinternational human rights standards could arguably have effects in the domesticorder of a state.  \n## 2 The Border Guard Cases\n\nIn the border guard cases,East German soldiers who had killed fugitives or othertrespassers on the GDR or East Berlin border were tried on charges of homicide.Thosefound guilty were sentenced to prison terms.³Government officials,such as membersof the GDR National Defence Council,held responsible as the guards'superiors,weresimilarly brought to trial.On appeal from the judgments of the trial courts,theBundesgerichtshof(the federal court for civil and c","cbCaiiqDdtxGsjW9","https://ap.wps.com/l/cbCaiiqDdtxGsjW9","pdf",570955,"English","# Abstract\n# 1 Introduction\n# 2 The Border Guard Cases","[{\"question\":\"What legal framework did German courts apply after reunification for crimes committed in GDR territory?\",\"answer\":\"The Unification Treaty required applying the GDR criminal law to acts committed in GDR territory before unification, unless the Federal Republic’s law was more favourable to the defendant.\"},{\"question\":\"What was the core defence raised by border guard defendants in these cases?\",\"answer\":\"Defendants argued that GDR law had provided justification for their conduct, so their actions were lawful and should not be treated as criminal.\"},{\"question\":\"How did international human rights feature in the courts’ reasoning?\",\"answer\":\"The courts used international human rights standards to argue that the GDR laws should yield to a higher legal norm, and they discussed ex post facto issues addressed by the Federal Constitutional Court.\"}]","The German Border GuardCases and International HumanRights | PDF",25]