Explore the vast range of titles available.

En febrero de 1975 miembros del Comité Ejecutivo del Partido Comunista de España marxista-leninista, el PCE (m-l), se desplazaron a París con el objeto de recibir orientaciones políticas de la dirección residente en el extranjero. Entre las directrices marcadas se fijó la necesidad de llevar a cabo acciones de mayor violencia con el fin de darse a conocer. Para ello se servirían de su organización de masas, el FRAP. En ejecución de estos planes el 14 de julio de 1975 fue asesinado el policía armado Lucio Rodríguez Martín en la calle Alenza de Madrid. Y, un mes después, el teniente de la Guardia Civil Antonio Pose Rodríguez en la puerta de su casa en el barrio de El Batán, también de la capital. Once sospechosos de haber cometido ambos atentados fueron detenidos y juzgados en dos Consejos de guerra celebrados en el acuartelamiento de El Goloso (Madrid). El primero, ordinario, los días 11 y 12 de septiembre de 1975 y el segundo, sumarísimo, el 18 de ese mismo mes. El resultado: dos sentencias, once condenas, ocho de ellas a muerte. Finalmente cinco fueron conmutadas. Las otras tres fueron ejecutadas el 27 de septiembre de 1975.

El objetivo de este artículo es presentar el perfil del veterano del ejército español en la primera mitad del siglo XVII, centrándose en la duración de su servicio y el deterioro de su condición física. Con este fin se han estudiado un conjunto de peticiones elevadas al Consejo de Guerra conservadas en el Archivo General de Simancas. Con ello se pretende arrojar luz sobre la presencia de los veteranos en el mundo moderno como un nuevo grupo social.  

El objetivo de este artículo es analizar la documentación del siglo XVII perteneciente a la serie de “Expedientes de causas, cruces, retiros y casamientos”, custodiada en el Archivo General de la Administración y producida por el Consejo de Guerra en el ejercicio de sus funciones de personal. Analiza en primer lugar la historia archivística del fondo, la historia institucional del Consejo de Guerra y la tipología documental. Apunta posibles líneas de investigación a partir de esta documentación.

En este trabajo me propongo explorar el funcionamiento de los Consejos de Guerra o tribunales militares que actuaron en los límites del aparato represivo legal de la última dictadura militar argentina. Estos tribunales fueron concebidos hacia fines del siglo XIX como fueros diferenciados destinados a mantener la disciplina de las Fuerzas Armadas. Sin embargo, desde comienzos de la década del sesenta, más tarde en los primeros años setenta y especialmente desde el golpe de Estado militar de marzo de 1976 se convirtieron en cuerpos extrajudiciales concentrados en acusar y juzgar a civiles por medio de la figura del delito político. La historiografía argentina aún no ha reconocido el papel significativo que desempeñaron los Consejos de Guerra al contribuir con el proceso de judicialización de la represión política, con la redefinición de una legalidad autoritaria y con una nueva racionalidad política. Abstract In this paper I will explore the mechanisms by which the councils of war or military courts that were involved in the last military dictatorship in Argentina, acted on the border between legality and illegality within the framework of the legal repressive apparatus of that time. These courts were conceived in the late nineteenth century as distinct jurisdictions intended to maintain discipline in the armed forces. However, since the early sixties, later in the early seventies and especially since the March 1976 coup, they became extrajudicial bodies that judged and prosecute civilians for political crimes. Argentina’s historiography has not yet fully recognized the significant role played by these councils of war as contributors to the process of judicialization of political repression, the redefinition of authoritarian legality and a new political rationality.

In Spain between 1936-1945, the Franco regime carried out one Europe’s more brutal but less remembered programs of mass repression. Many were murdered by the regime’s death squads, and in some areas Francoists also subjected up to 15% of the population to summary military trials. Here many suffered the death sentence or jail terms up to thirty years. Although historians have recognised the staggering scale of the trials, they have tended to overlook the mass participation that underpinned them. In contrast to the discussion in other European countries, little attention has been paid to the wide scale collusion in the killings and incarcerations in Spain. Exploring mass complicity in the trials of hundreds of thousands of defeated Republicans following the end of the Spanish Civil War, The Francoist Military Trials probes local Francoists’ accusations whereby victims were selected for prosecution in military courts. It also shows how insubstantial and hostile testimony formed the bedrock of ‘investigations’, secured convictions, and shaped the harsh sentencing practices of Franco’s military judges. Using civil court records, it also documents how grassroots Francoists continued harassing Republicans for many years after they emerged from prison. Challenging the popularly prevalent view that the Franco regime imposed a police state upon a passive Spanish society, the evidence Anderson uncovers here illustrates that local state officials and members of the regime’s support base together forged a powerful repressive system that allowed them to wage war on elements of their own society to a greater extent than perhaps even the Nazis managed against their own population. List of Illustrations. Acknowledgments. Introduction. The Killing That Will Not Die. Part I: The Roots of Conflict. 1. Planting the Seeds, 1898-1923. 2. The Arrival of the Masses, 1923-1933. 3. Sharpening the Knives, 1933-1936. Part II: Rebellion and Occupation. 4. Rebel Terror. 5. Climbing out of the Abyss: The struggle to Bring Order in Loyalist Spain, 1936-1939. 6. Franco’s Juridical Monstrosity. Part III: Patria Chica, Infierno Grande. 7. The Pozoblanco Partido: A Case Study in Grassroots Judicial Terror. 8. Denouncing the Defeated. 9. Into the Dock. 10. Under the Judicial Hammer. Part IV: Civil Death. 11. Caught in the Web. 12. Dashing Families against the Rocks. Epilogue. Making Francoism from Below. References. Index. Peter Anderson is a British Academy Research Fellow in the Department of International History, London School of Economics. 'Anderson's book is a brilliant exposition of Franco's social cleansing, focused on a case study.' – Jose M. Faraldo, Universidad Complutense de Madrid 'This book, taken as a whole, and even though it does not explain military repression in Franco’s Spain, is an invaluable work, one that must be consulted for any study of the issue. Anderson offers new venues and analysis that would certainly improve our understanding of the problem.' – Antonio Cazorla-Sánchez, Trent University

The recent Boumediene v. Bush decision, which tossed aside the dysfunctional military court system envisioned by the Bush administration and upheld the right of habeas corpus for detainees, promises to throw national security law into chaos, and will also probably lead to the closing of Guantanamo. In this timely and much-needed book, Glenn Sulmasy, one of America’s leading experts on national security law, opens with a much-needed history of America’s long and complicated experience with such courts since the early days of the Republic. After tracing their evolution in the contemporary era, Sulmasy argues for a more sensible approach to the global war on terror’s unique set of prisoners. He proposes a reasonable “third way” solution that avoids even more extreme measures, on the one hand, and a complete shuttering of the court system, on the other. Instead, he advocates creating a separate standing judicial system, overseen by civilian judges, that allows for habeas corpus appeals and which focuses exclusively on existing war-on-terror cases as well as the inevitable cases to come. For all those who want to explore the crucial legal issues behind the headlines about Gitmo and the rights of detainees, The National Security Court System offers a clear-headed assessment of where we are and where we ought to be going.

p strongExamines the ways military tribunals seek to administer justice/strong The Al-Qaeda terror attacks of September 11, 2001 aroused a number of extraordinary counter measures in response, including an executive order authorizing the creation of military tribunals or \"commissions\" for the trial of accused terrorists. The Supreme Court has weighed in on the topic with some controversial and deeply divided decisions. emExtraordinary Justice/em seeks to fill an important gap in our understanding of what military tribunals are, how they function, and how successful they are in administering justice by placing them in comparative and historical context. Peter Judson Richards examines tribunals in four modern conflicts: the American Civil War, the British experience in the Boer War, the French tribunals of the \"Great War,\" and Allied practices during the Second World War. Richards also examines the larger context of specific political, legal and military concerns, addressing scholarly and policy debates that continually arise in connection with the implementation of these extraordinary measures. He concludes that while the record of the national tribunals has been mixed, enduring elements in the character of warfare, of justice, and the nature of political reality together justify their continued use in certain situations./p

Analyses the ways American leaders have justified the use of military tribunals, the suspension of due process, and the elimination of habeas corpus Though the war on terrorism is said to have generated unprecedented military situations, arguments for the Patriot Act and military tribunals following 9/11 resemble many historical claims for.

La represión franquista sobre el profesorado afectó principalmente a quienes tenían una ideología de izquierdas y defendían el laicismo republicano, circunstancias que solían compartir buena parte de los afiliados a la Federación Española de Trabajadores de la Enseñanza, y desde luego sus líderes. Uno de esos líderes fue el pontevedrés Víctor Fraiz Villanueva, que sufrió dos consejos de guerra debido a su actuación política, sindical y docente, uno en 1934 y otro, que lo condujo ante un pelotón de fusilamiento, en 1937. En este trabajo se analizan sus últimos tres años de vida.

El general Aguilera, ex ministro de la Guerra (1917), fue el presidente del Consejo Supremo de Guerra y Marina entre 1921 y 1924, por lo que se convirtió en el principal responsable de incorporar, estudiar, debatir e impartir justicia en el asunto de las responsabilidades de los militares en el desastre de Annual. El Expediente Picasso, instruido desde agosto de 1921 con carácter meramente informativo para depurar las posibles responsabilidades, fue elevado en 1922 al Consejo Supremo de Guerra y Marina con el fin de dirimir las responsabilidades penales de los militares implicados en la campaña militar que acabó en el desastre. El asunto de las responsabilidades tomó un nuevo rumbo en la sede del máximo organismo de la justicia militar, que intentó buscar a todos los responsables y repartir las culpabilidades entre todos los implicados, incluso entre los jefes militares excluidos deliberadamente del Expediente Picasso. La implacable búsqueda de responsables políticos y militares tanto en las Cortes como en el Consejo Supremo resultó determinante en el golpe de Estado del 13 de septiembre de 1923. El rey Alfonso XIII, según todos los indicios, pudo jugar un destacado protagonismo en el origen del régimen dictatorial con el fin de quitarse de en medio la pesadilla de las responsabilidades del desastre de Annual. Además, se incorpora la opinión del entonces joven comandante de la Legión Francisco Franco Bahamonde sobre las causas y responsabilidades de Annual, expresada en una serie de cartas inéditas escritas entre 1921 y 1923. General Aguilera, former Minister of War (1917), was the president of the Supreme Council of War and the Navy between 1921 and 1924, and became the main responsible for incorporating, studying, debating and dispensing justice in the matter of the responsibilities of the military in the Annual disaster. The Expediente Picasso, which had been underway since August 1921 for purely informative purposes in order to determine possible responsibilities, was submitted in 1922 to the Supreme Council of War and the Navy with the aim of determining the criminal responsibilities of the military personnel involved in the military campaign that ended in the disaster. The issue of responsibility took a new turn at the highest military justice body, which tried to find all those responsible and apportion blame among all those involved, including the military commanders deliberately excluded from the Expediente Picasso. The relentless research for political and military leaders in both the Cortes and the Supreme Council was to prove decisive in the coup d’état of 13 September 1923. King Alfonso XIII, according to all indications, may have played an important role in the origin of the dictatorial regime in order to get rid of the nightmare of the responsibilities of the Annual disaster. In addition, it includes the opinion of the then young commander of the Legion Francisco Franco Bahamonde on the causes and responsibilities of Annual, expressed in a series of unpublished letters written between 1921 and 1923.