International Humanitarian Law and World War II Slovenia
This series examines legal concepts relevant to armed conflict, occupation, resistance, collaboration, war crimes, and post-war justice. Each paper analyzes one legal issue under international law and applies it to events in Slovenia during and immediately after the Second World War. These papers are intended as scholarly reference materials and will eventually form the basis of a comprehensive volume. Click on the download button to download a paper.
More papers will be added every month.
Sources are listed in the following papers:
Legal Sources for Concept Papers
History Sources for Concept Papers (coming soon)
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Legal Concept Paper No. 1
Legal Status of Armed Organizations in Occupied Slovenia (1941-1945)
Abstract
A framework for classifying armed organization under international humanitarian law, including occupiers, regular armies, resistance movements, auxiliary forces, and de facto authorities.
Publication date: July 2026
Pages: 28
Keywords: Hague Regulations, occupation, belligerency, Partisans, Home Guards, Chetniks, Village Guards, SNVZ, SNV
Suggested citation
Maria Velikonja, Legal Status of Armed Organizations in Occupied Slovenia (1941-1945), Legal Concept Paper No. 1, Planinca Press (2026).
Download PDF (coming soon)
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Legal Concept Paper No. 2
The Slovene Home Guard and International Criminal Law: Rejecting Collective Guilt
Abstract
This article examines whether, under contemporary principles of international criminal law, membership in the Slovene Home Guard or participation in military operations against the Partisans would, without proof of individual criminal conduct, constitute a basis for criminal liability. It argues that the answer is no. The principles developed at Nuremberg and consistently applied by modern international tribunals reject collective guilt and require proof of individual criminal responsibility.
Publication date: July 2026
Pages: 8
Keywords: Hague Regulations, occupation, Partisans, collaboration, Slovene Home Guard, International criminal law, Individual criminal responsibility, Collective guilt, ICTY, Nuremberg Tribunal, International humanitarian law, War crimes, Occupation law, World War II, Slovenia
Suggested citation
Maria Velikonja, The Slovene Home Guard and International Criminal Law: Rejecting Collective Guilt, Legal Concept Paper No. 2, Planinca Press (2026).
Download PDF
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Legal Concept Paper No. 3
The Slovenian Tragedy of 1945: Did the British Take the Geneva Convention Seriously?
Abstract
This article examines the forced repatriation of approximately 10,000 Slovenian anti-communists from British-controlled Austria to communist Yugoslavia in May 1945 through the framework of the 1929 Geneva Convention Relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War. Drawing upon original archival research conducted at the British National Archives in London, the paper explores the legal and moral tensions confronting British authorities during the final weeks of the Second World War as they struggled to reconcile the Convention’s requirement for the repatriation of prisoners of war with its humanitarian principles prohibiting inhumane treatment and unlawful executions. The archival record demonstrates that British policy initially opposed compulsory repatriation and, in several documented cases, facilitated the evacuation of Slovenian soldiers and civilians to displaced persons camps in Italy. It further reveals extensive debate among British officials regarding the treatment of prisoners of war and refugees who feared persecution upon return to communist-controlled territories.
The article argues that the abrupt reversal of this policy in late May 1945 cannot be understood solely as a logistical response to the refugee crisis but must also be viewed within the broader political context of Allied relations with Yugoslavia and the Soviet Union. The archival evidence lends substantial support to Count Nikolai Tolstoy’s contention that a high-level policy reversal occurred, although important documentary evidence remains unavailable or missing. Employing the perspective of modern international humanitarian and criminal law, the paper emphasizes the enduring principles that criminal responsibility is individual rather than collective and that membership in a military force, without proof of personal criminal conduct, does not establish criminal liability. The mass executions that followed the repatriations, now widely recognized as crimes against humanity, underscore the profound humanitarian consequences of the British decision. Combining archival research with the author’s professional experience in international criminal justice and personal connection to the events, this article contributes to the continuing historical and legal reassessment of one of the most controversial episodes of the immediate postwar period.
Publication date: July 2026
Pages: 5
Keywords: Hague Regulations, POWs, collective guilt, Viktring, Nikolai Tolstoy, occupation, Partisans, Home Guards, collaboration, 1929 Geneva Convention
Suggested citation
Maria Velikonja, The Slovenian Tragedy of 1945: Did the British Take the Geneva Convention Seriously?, Legal Concept Paper No. 3, Planinca Press (2026).
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Legal Concept Paper No. 4
Would the Slovenian post-WWII massacres today be described as crimes against humanity under modern international humanitarian law?
Abstract
This paper examines whether the mass executions and enforced disappearances that occurred in Slovenia following the end of the Second World War, particularly during May and June 1945, would today be characterized as crimes against humanity under modern international criminal law. Although the term “crimes against humanity” first became a codified offense with the 1945 London Charter of the International Military Tribunal, its contemporary legal meaning has been substantially developed through the jurisprudence of the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY), the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR), and Article 7 of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. Applying these modern legal standards, the paper analyzes whether the post-war killings satisfy the required contextual elements of a widespread or systematic attack directed against a civilian population or persons hors de combat, carried out pursuant to a State or organizational policy and with the requisite knowledge of the perpetrators. It further examines the underlying offenses that may arise under contemporary international law, including murder, extermination, persecution, imprisonment, torture, enforced disappearance, and other inhumane acts, while emphasizing the fundamental principle that criminal responsibility is individual rather than collective. Distinguishing legal analysis from historical and political debate, the paper concludes that there is a substantial legal basis for characterizing many of the post-war atrocities in Slovenia as crimes against humanity under present-day international criminal law, provided that the necessary evidentiary requirements and standards of individual criminal responsibility are satisfied.
Publication date: August 2026
Pages: 6
Keywords: massacres, crimes against humanity, Partisans, collaboration, Slovene Home Guard, International criminal law, Individual criminal responsibility, Collective guilt, ICTY, Nuremberg Tribunal, International humanitarian law, War crimes, Occupation law, World War II, Slovenia
Suggested citation
Maria Velikonja, Would the Slovenian post-WWII massacres today be described as crimes against humanity under modern international humanitarian law?, Legal Concept Paper No. 4, Planinca Press (2026).
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Legal Concept Paper No. 5
From Collaboration to Criminal Responsibility: Rethinking the Legal Status of Slovenian Forces in World War II
Abstract
This paper examines the distinction between historical claims of “collaboration” with the occupying powers in Slovenia during the Second World War and individual criminal responsibility under modern international law. It argues that collaboration, although historically and politically significant, is not itself an independent international crime and cannot substitute for proof of individual criminal conduct. The law of occupation necessarily contemplated interaction between occupying authorities and the civilian population, including the continuation of administrative, police, and other public functions. Accordingly, the legal characterization of an individual must depend not on organizational affiliation, political allegiance, or the historical label of “collaborator,” but on the individual’s specific conduct, knowledge, intent, and legally recognized mode of participation in an international crime. Applying this framework to occupied Slovenia, the paper distinguishes between mere association or membership in an organization and participation in murder, persecution, torture, unlawful detention, or other prohibited acts. It further examines the relevance of collaboration as evidence of knowledge, intent, or contribution to criminal conduct while emphasizing that such evidence does not, standing alone, establish criminal liability. This distinction is particularly significant in assessing the Slovene Home Guard and other Slovenian armed organizations and in separating questions of wartime conduct from the separate legal issues arising from the surrender, repatriation, and subsequent killing of Slovenian forces in 1945. The paper concludes that modern international criminal law requires individualized assessment of criminal conduct and rejects the use of historical or political labels as substitutes for proof of individual responsibility.
Publication date: August 2026
Pages: 7
Keywords: Collaboration; Occupation; Occupying Power; Individual Criminal Responsibility; International Criminal Law; Law of Occupation; War Crimes; Crimes Against Humanity; Collective Guilt; Individual Responsibility; Slovene Home Guard; Slovenia; World War II; German Occupation; Aiding and Abetting; Political Affiliation.
Suggested Citation:
Maria Velikonja, From Collaboration to Criminal Responsibility: Rethinking the Legal Status of Slovenian Forces in World War II, Legal Concept Paper 5, Planinca Press (2026)
____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Legal Concept Paper No. 6
Collaboration, Treason, and the Law of Occupation: What Was Actually a Crime in Occupied Slovenia, 1941–1945?
Abstract
This paper examines the legal status of collaboration, treason, military service under an occupying power, auxiliary police service, and participation in war crimes in occupied Slovenia between 1941 and 1945, with particular attention to the Slovene Home Guard and the Partisan movement. It argues that these categories, although frequently conflated in historical and political discourse, represent distinct legal concepts that must be analyzed according to the law applicable at the time of the conduct. Drawing principally upon the 1907 Hague Regulations, applicable rules governing armed conflict and occupation, and emerging principles of individual criminal responsibility, the paper distinguishes political or administrative cooperation with an occupying power from conduct constituting an international crime. It further examines the significance of coercion, voluntary military service, allegiance, command relationships, military and police functions, and individual participation in prohibited acts. Applying the same legal framework to both the Home Guard and the Partisans, the paper argues that neither organizational membership nor political allegiance, standing alone, establishes individual criminal responsibility. Instead, liability must rest upon proof of specific prohibited conduct, the applicable legal rule, the individual’s role and participation, and the requisite knowledge or intent. The paper therefore proposes an individualized, conduct-based methodology for evaluating wartime responsibility in Slovenia, one that distinguishes historical characterization from legal culpability and avoids both collective guilt and the selective application of international humanitarian law.
Publication date: August 2026
Pages: 16
Keywords: Occupied Slovenia; law of occupation; international humanitarian law; collaboration; treason; Slovene Home Guard; Slovene Partisans; military service under occupation; auxiliary police; wartime allegiance; coercion; voluntary military service; Hague Regulations of 1907; laws and customs of war; war crimes; individual criminal responsibility; collective guilt; domestic criminal law; customary international law; conduct-based liability; command responsibility; prisoners of war; civilians; resistance movements; Axis occupation; Yugoslavia; World War II; temporal legality; nullum crimen sine lege; Nuremberg Principles; historical legal analysis.
Suggested citation
Maria Velikonja, Collaboration, Treason, and the Law of Occupation: What Was Actually a Crime in Occupied Slovenia, 1941–1945?, Legal Concept Paper No. 6, Planinca Press (2026).
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Legal Concept Paper No. 7
The Law in Force, 1941–1945, Versus Postwar Law
Abstract
This paper examines the temporal application of international criminal law to conduct occurring in occupied Slovenia between 1941 and 1945, focusing on the distinction between the law in force during the Second World War and legal developments that emerged after 1945. It begins with the principle of nullum crimen sine lege, emphasizing that criminal responsibility must be grounded in a legal rule applicable at the time of the conduct. The analysis identifies the 1907 Hague Regulations, the 1929 Geneva Convention relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War, customary international law, and established laws and customs of war as the principal legal sources for evaluating wartime conduct. It then examines the significance and limitations of the Nuremberg Charter and judgment, Control Council Law No. 10, and subsequent jurisprudence of the ICTY and International Criminal Court, distinguishing rules that clarified or codified pre-existing law from genuinely subsequent legal developments that cannot simply be applied retroactively. Particular attention is given to the legal consequences of military service under occupation, domestic treason, and individual participation in war crimes, as well as the more complex temporal questions surrounding crimes against humanity. Applying the same temporal standard to both the Slovene Home Guard and the Partisan movement, the paper argues that neither political allegiance nor organizational membership establishes criminal responsibility without proof of conduct prohibited by the law applicable at the relevant time. It proposes a two-stage methodology: first determining whether conduct was criminal under the law in force in 1941–1945, and second, where appropriate, assessing how the same conduct would be characterized under modern international criminal law. This approach seeks to avoid both anachronistic criminalization and anachronistic exoneration while preserving the principle of individualized criminal responsibility.
Publication date: August 2026
Pages: 18
Keywords:
Temporal legality; nullum crimen sine lege; international criminal law; international humanitarian law; law of occupation; 1907 Hague Regulations; 1929 Geneva Convention; customary international law; laws and customs of war; Nuremberg Tribunal; Nuremberg Charter; Control Council Law No. 10; crimes against humanity; war crimes; Rome Statute; ICTY; ICC; retroactivity; individual criminal responsibility; domestic treason; military service under occupation; Slovene Home Guard; Slovene Partisans; occupied Slovenia; World War II; Yugoslavia; historical legal analysis; postwar law; comparative legal analysis; anachronistic criminalization; conduct-based liability.
Suggested citation
Maria Velikonja, The Law in Force, 1941–1945, Versus Postwar Law, Legal Concept Paper No. 7, Planinca Press (2026).
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________