Ivo Politeo: povijesna stvarnost Nezavisne Države Hrvatske iz odvjetničke pozicije
IVO POLITEO: THE HISTORICAL REALITY OF THE INDEPENDENT STATE OF CROATIA FROM A LAWYER’S POINT OF VIEW

Summary/Abstract: This article reviews some of the main conceptual frameworks in the legal political thinking of the prominent Croatian legal scholar Ivo Politeo (Split 1887 – Zagreb 1956) and his experiences during the Second World War, 1941-1945. Politeo’s professional career, which began in 1920, was characterized by a strong influence of European constitutionalism, from this point of view he was exposed to criticism in the Independent State of Croatia. Politeo was pushed marginalized by the ruling Ustaša regime. This was to a large extent caused by the split between nationalist and liberal intellectuals and the Ustaša propaganda against liberal teachings which place the state above the nation. Even though he was removed as the head of the Croatian legal society, Politeo remained a fi rm presence in the public life of the Independent State of Croatia as the head of the editorial board of the legal professional journal Mjesečnik, established back in 1879. Politeo’s texts and editorials in Mjesečnik were above all tied to the drastic imbalance between public security matters and human rights in the Independent State of Croatia. Politeo was likewise critical of the Ustaša principle of leadership based on the notion that the exercise of power by the head of state contravened legal rights. As such, he believed that the head of state was bound by the responsibility of protecting order, law and security, that is to stay, the head of state entered a contractual relationship with the nation. If the head of state does not carry out these responsibilities, that is, fails to maintain law and order, then the head of state loses the claim to that sovereignty that stems from the nation. The fact that the Independent State of Croatia relied entirely on a repressive regulatory framework stimulated in Politeo’s thinking the issue of the limit of the state’s right to defend itself. He felt that the state had a right to defend itself but that in doing so it could not suspend basic human rights. Holding the notion that repressive legislation does not strengthen the essence of the state, Politeo was critical of the military (extraordinary) courts in the Independent State of Croatia. He clearly stated to the institutions responsible for carrying out justice in the state that these courts were eroding the basic right to a fair trial and the defense lawyers were limited in their defense of the accused. Politeo was likewise critical of these courts because he felt they numbed the emotions of the judges who presided over them, led these judges to lose their natural sense of justice, and habituated them to handing out death sentences. According to Politeo, what made a state just was its ability to create a normative framework for the betterment of all citizens. What determines the quality of a state to Politeo is its ability to advance the general good.

• Details
• Contents