NCJ Number
204869
Date Published
2004
Length
14 pages
Annotation
This chapter examines aspects of vengeance versus reconciliation through an analysis of the events surrounding the German invasion of Norway and the Nazi concentration camps.
Abstract
The author discusses his perceptions of how punishment was carried out for those involved with the Nazi party. The Commander of the death-camp Birkenau was hung for his crimes without benefit of an official trial, inquiry, or hearing. However, the hanging of the Commander and those under his immediate authority accomplished the task of keeping the social order. Vengeance at the state level needed to be carried out swiftly in order to avoid an overwhelming and uncontrollable public riot. Thus, the official and public hanging prevented the private vengeance of citizens; it calmed the volatile situation. The author describes a 2002 meeting concerning the events that occurred in Narvik 60 years before. Although the meeting was declared an opportunity for peace and reconciliation, not all parties participated in the meetings, making the claims of reconciliation ring hallow. The consequences of delaying punishment in the Narvik case, in which Yugoslavian prisoners were killed by Norwegian collaborators, is that the public outrage was not quelled and continues to this day. The benefits of reconciliation as an alternative to penal law are considered, as are the most recent penal responses to atrocities, international tribunals, and the International Penal Court. According to the author, justice processes that promote reconciliation also promote a peace that is shared by all parties. Penal law, on the other hand, does not promote peace. On the contrary, it is an adversarial process designed to assign guilt and dole out punishment. Furthermore, the author charges that the new International Penal Court will likely harm reconciliation activities, rather than promote them. In the end there are no good solutions for repairing the harm created by atrocities, however, reconciliation goes further toward healing the pain than penal responses have. Notes, references