CRIME AND PUNISHMENT IN INTERWAR POLAND (1918-1939)

Abstract

For almost three quarters of the interwar period in Poland, the criminal law of the occupants was in force. Amendments and alterations to the old, non-Polish criminal codes introduced by the Polish authorities transferred the criminal law into a complex and confusing system of rules. Different interpretations of crimes and punishments in the criminal codes of the former occupants did not contribute to the objective determination of the level of legitimacy in the state. In the 1920’s, due to some stabilization of social and partly economic relations, the crime rate dropped somewhat. However, the statistics showed that the percentage of the most dangerous crimes (robbery, murder) was significant, and a large number of thieves escaped punishment. This testified to the low effectiveness of the fight against crime. An important step in the fight against crime was the adoption of the new Polish Criminal Code and the Law of Torts in 1932. The categories and types of crimes as well as the penalties were determined. Criminal liability was subjective and individualized. A modern legal framework was created that allowed to counter crime effectively. The most common crimes in interwar Poland were crimes concerning life and health, property, theft, economic and service crimes. Much of the crimes belonged to minor crimes. Arrest and imprisonment dominated the sentencing. However, the courts applied the death penalty for serious crimes. By number of crimes (property, murder) Poland was the first in Europe. Certain types of crime prevailed in different regions of Poland, which resulted from their specific social and economic and cultural development. The dynamics of a steady increase in crime (homicides, thefts, frauds, injuries) took place throughout almost the entire period. Only at the end of the period the crime rate dropped somewhat. The criminal policy of the Polish authorities was controversial. On the one hand, the repressiveness of punishments increased, on the other – unjustified condescension to a number of publicly threatening crimes. Judicial practice in the handling of cases had a significant impact on the crime. The administration of the Criminal Code was associated with some difficulties, first of all, insufficient professional training of judges. Commonly, the sentences of judges on different types of crimes were not always fair, which caused a negative reaction in society. The nature and extent of crime were directly related to the social and economic development of society, the level of legal consciousness, morality and the general level of culture.