The legal aspects of post-war slayings and the treatment of prisoners in the weider zasavje region

Tematika diplomskega dela zavzema pravni pogled povojnih pobojev na širšem področju Zasavja v letu 1945. Po kratkem orisu vojnega prava sledi pregled mednarodnih konvencij, predvsem ženevske konvencije o ravnanju z vojnimi ujetniki iz leta 1929, ki je takrat najbolj celovito urejala področje vojnih ujetnikov. Nato sledi Martensova klavzula, ki opredeljuje postopanje vojskujočih strani v primeru, kjer situacija ni pravno opredeljiva. Na kratko je opisana Uredba o vojaških sodiščih, ki je avtonomen partizanski vir za področje kazenskega prava. Po pregledu takrat veljavnega prava sledi ugotavljanje odgovornosti za storjene zločine iz dveh vidikov. Prvi je komandna odgovornost, drugi pa institut udeležbe v skupini, ki je zakrivila vojne zločine. Vsebinski del se nadaljuje z opisom kršitev prava s strani prič in opredelitvijo glavnega problema – kaj je šlo takrat narobe, da je pravo odpovedalo? Ter posledično - kaj lahko storimo, da se takšni dogodki ne ponovijo?The subject of my thesis are legal views of post-war slayings in the year 1945 in the wider area of Zasavje region. After a brief outline of military law is a review of international conventions, with a primary focus on the Geneva Convention from 1929 on the Treatment of Prisoners of War. At that time the Geneva Convention most extensively regulated the domain of prisoners of war. Then follows the Martens clause. This clause defines the conduct of the warring parties in circumstances where the situation cannot be legally determined. The Military Courts Regulation, which is an independent partisan source for the area of criminal law, is also discussed. Next is the review of the relevant law of the time, followed by accountability analysis for the committed crimes. The analysis has two aspects. The first one is a command responsibility, while the other one is the legal institute of participation in the group that committed war crimes. The substantive part continues with witnesses\u27 descriptions of law violations and the definition of the dominant issue - what went wrong that the law did not hold? And consequently - what can we do to prevent such events from happening again