KRIEGSWEHRMACHTGEFÄNGNIS (KWG) DUBNO

KWG Dubno (map 9e) was—along with Dünaburg (Daugavpils) and Borissow (Borisov/Barysaŭ)—one of the three KWGs that the Wehrmacht established in the occupied territories shortly after the invasion of the Soviet Union. The main deciding factors for the locations of these three KWGs—in the southern, northern, and central rear areas of the eastern front—were the existence of suitable buildings for housing prisoners and “convenient location to transportation hubs.”1 Under the “enforcement plan” of November 17, 1941, the purpose of KWG Dubno was to house prisoners from Army Group South (Heeresgruppe Süd), its rear areas, and the Military Commander (Wehrmachtsbefehlshaber) Ukraine, who were given sentences of up to three months imprisonment by military courts. Soldiers from these areas who were given longer sentences were transferred from Dubno “in regular, expedited transports” to Armed Forces Prison (Wehrmachtsgefängnis, WG) Glatz (today Kłodzko, Poland) in Lower Silesia. The KWG in Dubno had a Reception Center (Auffangsstelle) in Kiev.² Beginning in April 1942, the military penal system was largely transferred from the military prisons within Germany to the areas near the front,3 in the form of the newly created field penal battalions (Feldstrafgefangenen-Abteilungen, FStGA) and field penal camps (Feldstraflager); as a result, the responsibilities of KWG Dubno increased. From May 1942, it collected Wehrmacht soldiers from Army Group South who had been sentenced to the penal battalions and sent them on to FStGA 1.4 In this respect, by October 1943, FStGA 7, 8, 10, 12, 16, 17, and 18 had also been deployed to the southern section of the eastern front.

Like other KWGs, Dubno also served as a temporary residence for prisoners from the nearby penal battalions who were unable to work due to stress, hunger, and abuse. The basis for this practice was derived from the guidelines for medical care in the penal battalions, in which was stated: “Hospital care for prisoners is carried out … under strict supervision in the army or army group rear area; a transfer to a hospital in the homeland or, respectively, to a replacement unit (here: Armed Forces Prison) is not to occur.” Military prisoners who were “physically and medically unfit,” according to the judgment of both the battalion doctor and the doctor of the higher division, were then to be “sent to the responsible Kriegswehrmachtgefängnis” for treatment.5 If the reports differed with each other, the prisoner would remain with the battalion. One such prisoner sent to KWG Dubno was Fritz D. from FStGA 16, who was no longer able to work due to malnutrition. He reported: “One day a column went to Dubno, and we undernourished and sick prisoners were driven [there]—70 kilometers [43.5 miles] by foot. In Dubno, they were supposed to let us recover, but we had to spend seven hours in the yard, double-timing. Every day, one saw deaths. Those who were near death were taken out at night to be shot.”6

That last quote indicates that KWG Dubno was already used as a remand prison in 1943, although the “accommodation of remanded prisoners and those provisionally detained” was first mentioned as a responsibility of the KWGs in instructions from September 4, 1944.7 Indeed, two shootings of prisoners in KWG Dubno have been documented. On September 18, 1943, two prisoners from FStGA, Paul Knott (b. November 21, 1919) and Waldemar Knappe (b. June 1, 1921), were executed for desertion.8

Even after the establishment of the field penal units, regular transports to the prisons within Germany continued. These transports carried either prisoners who were not healthy enough to be sent to the FStGAs9 or officers and non-commissioned officers who had been sentenced to more than three months’ imprisonment (without loss of rank) and were thus required to serve their sentences in the military prisons in Germany.10 In particular, those soldiers who had been sentenced under §102 Abs. 1 and 3 of the military penal code (Kriegsstrafverfahrensordnung) were sent back to Germany to be turned over to the civilian authorities.11 In practice, these transports also included soldiers who were determined to be “unworthy” of the military due to their criminal sentences and who would thus be expelled from the Wehrmacht. Soldiers under the authority of the Army Group South Rear Area Command (Befehlshaber des rückwärtigen Heeresgebietes Süd) who were given such sentences were sent from “KWG Dubno … to the Ratibor prison” in Upper Silesia, from which they were then sent via the prosecutor in Ratibor (today Racibórz, Poland) “to the Strafgefangenenlager [prison camp] Esterwegen.”12 [End Page 642]

Further transports from Dubno to Germany carried those who were considered to be “irredeemable” and were thus sentenced to the hardest form of military punishment, imprisonment in the field penal camps.13 The policy toward these prisoners was that “soldiers who were sent to the Field Penal Camps will be transferred only via WG Torgau-Fort Zinna—with the exception of those who can be transferred directly from the area of these Field Penal Camps.”14 Because there were no field penal camps in the area around KWG Dubno, soldiers from the area who were sentenced to terms in those camps were transferred from Dubno via WG Torgau-Fort Zinna. Finally, another unknown number of men were sent to Probationary Unit (Bewährungstruppe) 500. The associated risk to life and limb is illustrated by the example of Oberfeldwebel Andreas Seitz. On April 23, 1944, he was sentenced to five years in prison for alleged cowardice and was sent to KWG Dubno. On May 13, the chief of Luftflotte 4, his former unit, recommended him (apparently based on his previous good record) for transfer to the Probationary Unit.15 On June 14, he was sent to Probationary Unit 500 at Tomaszów Mazowiecki; by August 6, he was registered as “killed in action” by the 550th Infantry Battalion.

As the Red Army advanced during that time, KWG Dubno was moved to Lemberg (then also known as Lwów; today L’viv, Ukraine). The closing of the prison at Dubno was ordered by the Armed Forces High Command (Oberkommando der Wehrmacht, OKW) on August 24, 1944, with the accompanying order to send the prisoners held there to WG Bruchsal, where a processing center was established.16 By September 31, 1944, KWG Dubno’s field post number (Feldpostnummer) had been struck.17

SOURCES

Additional information about KWG Dubno can be found in the following publications: Rudolf Absolon, Das Wehrmachtstrafrecht im 2. Weltkrieg. Sammlung der grundlegenden Gesetze, Verordnungen und Erlasse (Kornelimünster: Bundesarchiv, Abteilung Zentralnachweisstelle, 1958); and Peter Kalmbach, Wehrmachtjustiz (Berlin: Metropol, 2012).

NOTES

1. OKH—General z.b.V. beim OKH, Merkblatt 2 vom 24.1.1943, BA-MA, RH 13/v. 13, Bl. 3.

2. Allgemeine Heeresmitteilungen (AHM) 1941, hg. vom Oberkommando des Heeres, Berlin 1941 (8.), Nr. 1156 (OKW, 17.11.1941, 54 f 10 Str 3782/41 AHA/Ag/H [Str II]), p. 620 f.

3. See the entries for the individual FStGAs and Feldstraflager as well as WGL Donau.

4. Allgemeine Heeresmitteilungen (AHM) 1942, hg. vom Oberkommando des Heeres, Berlin 1942 (9.), Nr. 432 (OKW, 4.5.1942, 54 f 10 Vollstr. Pl. Str 1929/41 II. Ang. AHA/Ag H/Str II), p. 238.

5. OKH—General z.b.V. beim OKH Az. 524/Gr.Str. Nr. III 872/42 vom 28.10.1942, BA-MA, WF-03/32406, Bl. 192.

6. Lebenslauf von Fritz D. vom 3.7.1946, reproduced in Jörg Kammler, Ich habe die Metzelei satt und laufe über … Kasseler Soldaten zwischen Verweigerung und Widerstand (1939–1945): Eine Dokumentation, 2nd ed. (Fuldabrück: Hesse, 1985), p. 34. See also FStGA 16.

7. OKH—General z.b.V. beim OKH Az. 551/Gr.Str. Nr. 363/44 (Merkblatt über Vollzugseinrichtungen und Bewährungstruppen) vom 4.9.1944, BA-MA, RH 14/34, Bl. 82.

8. BArch PA, Todesurteile-Kartei (Bl. 102 of the photocopied form).

9. For the changes at the end of 1943, see FStGA 20.

10. See WG Glatz and Allgemeine Heeresmitteilungen (AHM), hg. vom Oberkommando des Heeres, Berlin 1942 (9.), Nr. 1034 (OKW, 27.11.1942, 54 f 10 Vollstr. Pl. Str 3495/42 Tr Abt [Str II]) mit Anlage, p. 576, partially reproduced in Fritz Wüllner, Die NS-Militärjustiz und das Elend der Geschichtsschreibung: Ein grundlegender Forschungsbericht, 2nd ed. (Baden-Baden: Nomos, 1997), p. 814.

11. See Rudolf Absolon, Das Wehrmachtstrafrecht im 2. Weltkrieg. Sammlung der grundlegenden Gesetze, Verordnungen und Erlasse (Kornelimünster, 1958), p. 204; and Peter Kalmbach, Wehrmachtjustiz (Berlin: Metropol, 2012), pp. 180–190.

12. Allgemeine Heeresmitteilungen (AHM) 1942, hg. vom Oberkommando des Heeres, Berlin 1942 (9.), Nr. 433 (OKW, 13.5.1942, 54 e 10 Bes.Geb.allg. Str 596/42 AHA/Ag H/Str II), S. 239. In addition to Esterwegen, other Moor camps in the Emsland region were used for the “custody” of troops deemed “unfit for combat.”

13. It reads: “In the case of ineducability, referral to the field penal camps, where the sentence will not run. Here greatly tightened conditions.” (Kurze Übersicht über Organisation und Aufgaben des Wehrmachtstrafvollzugs, der Bewährungstruppe sowie der Sondereinheiten des Heeres, Berlin, den 16.3.1943, BA-MA, RH 14/37.) See Feldstraflager I–III.

14. Allgemeine Heeresmitteilungen (AHM) 1942, hg. vom Oberkommando des Heeres, Berlin 1942 (9.), Nr. 433 (OKW, 13.5.1942, 54 e 10 Bes. Geb. allg. Str 596/42 AHA/Ag H/Str II), p. 239.

15. Der Chef der Luftflotte 4 A.B.L. 104/44—III—vom 13.5.1944, BArch PA, Inf.Btl. 550 z.b.V. Verlustmeldungen Mappe 2. See also Hans-Peter Klausch, Die Bewährungstruppe 500: Stellung und Funktion der Bewährungstruppe 500 im System von NS-Wehrrecht, NS-Militärjustiz und Wehrmachtstrafvollzug (Bremen: Temmen, 1995); and WG Torgau-Fort Zinna.

16. Allgemeine Heeresmitteilungen (AHM), hg. vom Oberkommando des Heeres, Berlin 1944 (11.), Nr. 455 (OKW—54 a 13—Truppen-Abt. [Str I] vom 24.8.1944), S. 249.

17. See Norbert Kannapin, Die deutsche Feldpostübersicht 1939–1945. Vollständiges Verzeichnis der Feldpostnummern in numerischer Folge und deren Aufschlüsselung. Bearbeitet nach den im Bundesarchiv-Militärarchiv verwahrten Unterlagen des Heeresfeldpostmeisters, vol. 3 (Osnabrück: Biblio, 1982), p. 77.

Share