DR. FREISLER TRANSLATION OF DOCUMENT NG-157 PROSECUTION EXHIBIT 103 LETTER FROM THE REICH MINISTER OF JUSTICE TO THE PRESIDENT OF THE PEOPLE’S COURT, 18 OCTOBER 1944, COMMENTING UPON ITS FUNCTIONS AND THE SELECTION OF PRESIDING JUDGES “IN PARTICULARLY IMPORTANT POLITICAL CASES” [Handwritten] MIi Berlin, 18 October 1944 [Handwritten]T 276 _Copy_ The Reich Minister of Justice To: The President of the People’s Court, Dr. Freisler Berlin W 9 Bellevuestrasse 15 [Handwritten] 18 October Bz Dear Mr. President: The importance of the People’s Court for the maintenance of the home front has greatly increased and is bound to increase still further after carrying into effect of the Fuehrer’s decree of 20 September 1944. The functions of the People’s Court must, therefore, not be confined to meting out adequate punishment to the accused, they must moreover fulfill the specific task of political leadership. This is inherent in the fact that the population not only recognizes the sentences of the People’s Court as right, but that, moreover, it also learns why any particular sentence has become expedient. The President of the senate is often hampered in conducting the proceedings, because in some particularly important political cases--including cases occurring frequently--the political evaluation of the offense is not always sufficiently shown up with a view to the prevailing situation of the people and of the Reich. If it is sufficient in nonpolitical criminal cases to show up the perpetrator, the deed and the effects of both on the national community and thus to find a just sentence, this is not sufficient for cases tried in the People’s Court. With due stress for the political aspect of the case it is necessary to discuss the conditions of the Reich and of the people. When conducting proceedings the president must be able to justify why this particular offense is especially dangerous for the population and the Reich and why it is especially grave. Everybody who is taking part in the proceedings must have the inner conviction when leaving the courtroom not only that the punishment was just but also why it was just. This also and quite particularly applies to the so-called cases of defeatism which from now on will be tried in an increased measure. Likewise, utterances must not be allowed to spring up which, for instance, say that proceedings before a certain senate mean certain death, or that the term “general public” is stretched too far in its legal definition. Whenever such utterances occur they can only be parried by a manner of conducting the proceedings which is superior, calm and--if need be--stone cold. In that case the people must always understand why in these crucial months of the war the instigator deserves death--but not so the gossip monger unless it happened not to