Formation of the Advanced School of the National Security Corps and the Department of Penology in the 1980s

Formation of the Advanced School of the National Security Corps and the Department of Penology in the 1980s Ondřej Hladík KEY WORDS: Czechoslovakia — National Security Corps — Penology — Normalization — Socialist Dictatorship At present, the normalization period yields a number of research topics which have been passing unnoticed by the experts so far, even though the topics open an essential range of issues which may be helpful in comprehending more profoundly the manner in which the 1970s and 1980s Czechoslovak society functioned. The topics include, for example, the National Security Corps’ education system under the patronage of the newly established departmental advanced school. Its formation was supported by, among others, the then declaration about the necessity to put scientific knowledge into practice. On the one hand, this fact caused not very meaningful accentuation of workpeople’s needs in preparation of state research plans, usual at that time; at the same time it opened up the path for directions of research which had been unthinkable until then. As implied in the introductory lines, these are extensive questions which have gone unheeded in treatises so far, not to mention potential wider coverage in the form of a comprehensive monograph. Therefore, there is no doubt that the presented paper, its form and extent not exceeding a larger article, does not aim to answer the questions but open the so far absent discussion and, in this manner, to serve as a springboard for further research. REDISCOVERING PENOLOGY Penology ranked among the disciplines which started to develop gradually with respect to the aforementioned situation. As is quite clear, this applied discipline, dealing with imprisonment as a method of correcting an offender, became completely unwelcome in the 1950s and, consequently, had no chance whatsoever to develop. This had not changed until the second half of the 1960s when, given the easing of the international situation, the Czechoslovak government had to agree to adoption of the new Act on Imprisonment (No. 59/1965 Coll.), which also enabled formation of the first erudite department focused on the issues of prison service, the Research Institute of Penology, Correctional Education Corps, Czech Socialist Republic [Výzkumný ústav penologický Sboru nápravné výchovy ČSR, VÚP SNV ČSR], headed by the clinical psychologist doc. PhDr. Jiří Čepelák, Csc. Relying on erudite research, the team of experts with higher-education degrees started to build a high-quality methodical base for prison educators and psychologists. In spite of the changes brought by August 76 WISOHIM/ESHP 20 1968, the department had survived within the armed forces until 1980 before it was dissolved also on the pretext of its ignoring practical needs, upon allegation that its activities were motivated especially by attempts to appeal to scientific circles.1 At the time this was not the only department in which it was possible to pursue penology. Since the late 1970s, the Advanced School of the National Security Corps [Vysoká škola Sboru národní bezpečnosti, VŠ SNB] included the Department of Penology [katedra penologie]; on April 1, 1979, though, it opened up as the Department of Correctional Education [katedra nápravné výchovy].2 As may be seen in the initial paragraphs, both the explored department and the entire school have gone completely unheeded by the researchers focused on the history of science in the second half of the 20th century. Even though this fact is quite understandable given the undeniable political accent, their achievements may not be completely ignored. Let us call to mind, to name at least one, criminalistics under the aegis of the school chief, genmjr. prof. Ján Pješčak, CSc., to this day a respected personality of the field.3 It must be added, though, that this was not field research (which was pursued especially by the Research Institute of Criminology [Výzkumný ústav kriminologický]) but rather applied science within the Faculty of the Public Security Service [fakulta Veřejné bezpečnosti, VB] as a part of the armed forces forming one of the regime’s linchpins of power. It is thus clear that the Department of Penology did not exist as a separate unit and was not lifted out of any period context. On the contrary, it formed an organic part of VŠ SNB. Before outlining data on its formation and activities, it will thus not be uninteresting also to summarize the basic information associated with the opening of the school as a whole, be it for necessary context or just because it has not been covered much. VŠ SNB: ESTABLISHMENT AND ACTIVITIES In socialist Czechoslovakia, the specific study of penology as a discipline, which later became an integral part of study at the aforementioned VB faculty, VŠ SNB, appeared first in 1966. The Faculty of Law, Charles University (PF UK), by virtue of the decree 1 Ondřej Hladík, Výzkumný ústav penologický — pokus o reformu českého vězeňství (Research Institute of Penology — Attempt to Reform Czech Prison Service), Historická penologie 1/2012, p. 47–53. 2 Emil Vašíček — Stanislav Nečas, Katedra nápravné výchovy na vysoké škole SNB, Zpravodaj SNV ČSR, December 1979, p. 10. 3 As for J. Pješčak, who, in the 1970s and 1980s, established himself as a criminalistics expert and issued several textbooks and treatises, a piece of information must be added regarding his activities in the 1950s. In 1950 he completed law studies and, as a part of his military service, he completed a course for legal officers and passed a judge exam. Since 1953, when he started his career of a professional soldier, he worked as a military prosecutor, who always advocated the Party views unfalteringly, which is why his name is associated with several death sentences. Biografický slovník představitelů ministerstva vnitra v letech 1948–1989, Praha 2009, p. 145. ONdŘEJ HladÍK 77 issued by the Minister of Education, launched education in the newly established criminalistic branch of study.4 In the conditions of the coming normalization of the early 1970s, however, this model of training security corps members ceased to be suitable as it was “mere” specialization within an extra-departmental higher education facility, one which “may secure the National Security Corps’ needs neither in terms of content nor capacity”.5 It is thus apparent that education acquired academically could not meet the needs of the regime in the process of reconsolidating its position of power. The pretext for reorganization of the departmental education was found in the necessity to improve results of fight against crime, together with increasing the number of security corps members with higher-education degrees from 3% to 40–60%, which was also connected with expected generational turnover at SNB. This was a legitimate objective associated with absorbing professional knowledge but, at the same time, it was abused for spreading suitable political dogmas. Therefore, a coherent plan was created for education of novices, who were meant to undergo comprehensive schooling within armed forces. For that reason, those in the actual military service with elementary education appeared to be ideal candidates. This was to guarantee the individuals’ sufficient loyalty — in this manner they were given the chance for social ascent, as in civil life they would have graduated from a secondary or even tertiary school only with difficulty. The described intentions were given foothold when the government of the Czechoslovak Socialist Republic adopted the decree No. 152/1970 Coll., which was aimed at reorganization of the existing professional education in SNB. These changes aimed, among others, to establish a new advanced school providing aegis for this system. The measures under preparation with regard to the principles governing the Security Corps members were also endorsed by the Central Committee of the Communist Party of Czechoslovakia (CPC). All follow-up negotiations were backed up by slogans about increasing efficiency of the fight against crime in line with scientific principles and knowledge, which again points to the effort to introduce a social paradigm based on emphasising results yielded by research as one of the elements stabilizing the society. In April 1973, the motion to establish the VŠ SNB was debated by the Legislative Council of the Government of the Czechoslovak Socialist Republic and, in September of that year, the Presidium of the Federal Assembly adopted the legislative measure No. 107/1973 Coll., on the Advanced School of the National Security Corps.6 The newly established institution thus obtained a university-type advanced school status pursuant to the Act on Higher Education7 but under specific conditions. 4 The decree issued by the Minister of Education Ref. No. 13 546/1966, based on the Section 50 par. 2, Act No. 19/1966 Coll., on Higher Education. 5 Security Services Archive (Archiv bezpečnostních složek, hereinafter referred to as “ABS”), VŠ SNB faculty, file 13, unsorted, motion by the College of the Minister of Interior, Czechoslovak Socialist Republic, for a complex of measures to secure construction of VŠ SNB, 1973. 6 Ibid. 7 Act No. 19/1966 Coll., as amended by the Act No. 163/1969 Coll. 78 WISOHIM/ESHP 20 Several sections of the said Act did not apply to its activities, of which exemption from the authority of the Minister of Education8 and subordination to the Federal Ministry of Interior may be considered absolutely essential. As far as general pedagogical matters were concerned, though, both national Ministers of Education had advisory rights.9 A fairly strange situation thus arose and there is no doubt that the civil ministers’ influence on the powerhouse ministry’s education facility was minimal. Given the principal theme of this paper it must be added, though, that study was permitted by the quoted law not only to the National Security Corps (SNB) members but also to those of the Correctional Education Corps (SNV); nor were professional soldiers excluded.10 Nevertheless, no department specialized on prison service had existed until 1979, although original plans did allow for a department focused on penology. It is, however, not yet clear why it was not established already once VŠ SNB was opened. Let us now outline briefly the practical aspect of the school’s operation, namely its location, internal structure and study conditions. By virtue of the decree issued by the Minister of Interior, the school opened up in September 1974; the position of the chief of the institution (corresponding in principle to a rector) was assumed by the hitherto under-secretary of the Minister of Interior, genmjr. prof. Ján Pješčak, CSc. From the beginning, the school comprised three Faculties: of State Security (StB, First Faculty), of Public Security Service (VB, Second Faculty) and of the State Border Protection (OSH, Third Faculty). Later the Faculty of Investigation in Bratislava (Fourth Faculty) was added. Apart from these specialized faculties there were also school-wide departments intended for all students.11 However, even before that, on August 31, 1974 the aforementioned criminalistics branch of the study within PF UK was terminated by virtue of the university rector’s decree. These actions were accompanied by conclusion, between both institutions, of a delimitation contract, which regulated both settlement of all administrative matters and education of specialized subjects. As agreed, the then classes of this branch of study were transferred to VŠ SNB, and they completed the study within PF UK in line with the original 1973 curriculum but already under the tutelage of the VŠ SNB teaching staff — which was an apparent effort to free the new specialists-tobe from the influence exerted by the judicial domain as it did not seem desirable for service in the armed force. As far as personnel is concerned, on the same date PF UK terminated employment of the Ministry of Interior members who had been assigned to teach in the criminalis8 Higher education schools were subjected to the authority of the Ministry of Education pursuant to the Sections 55 and 55a of the Act No. 19/1966 Coll. 9 Legislative Measure adopted by the Federal Assembly, Czechoslovak Socialist Republic, No. 107/1973 Coll., on the Advanced School of the National Security Corps, Section 5. 10 Ibid, Section 7. 11 These were the following Departments of: Marxism-Leninism; History and Theory of State and Law; Criminal Law and Criminology; Administrative Law; Security Law; International, Civil and Family Law; Control, Command and Information in the National Security Corps; Psychology, Pedagogy and Forensic Medicine; Languages; Military and Physical Training. ONdŘEJ HladÍK 79 tic branch of study; this is how civilian employees of the Faculty of Law ended up, too. Their conditions were even worse, though, as unlike their uniformed colleagues conclusion of new contracts was not allowed for in their case. Within delimitation of the study, works published were also taken over and libraries and other specialized equipment were allocated. Furthermore, VŠ SNB was providing the Faculty of Law with financial compensation for securing the study to the last years of students until 1978.12 In terms of the education system structure, VŠ SNB became its integral but autonomous part, which is also clear from its direct subordination to the Ministry of Interior. Its establishment continued to be backed up by clichés on the necessity to spread expert knowledge results into practice of everyday service: “As a result of the development of the scientific and technical revolution, the present sees unprecedented increase of demands regarding the National Security Corps members’ qualifications and the quality of their service.”13 The aforementioned improvement of professional qualifications was not the only reason, though. Even though it alone represented a significant legitimization measure in the society’s perspective (how the public accepted this stance is itself a question), the emphasis on using the school, in the spirit of hitherto political decisions, as a thorough pro-regime instrument intended to prepare loyal “cadres” remained identically evident. Even in this position the emphasis on science persisted but already tangibly interconnected with ideology: “It is an important scientific and pedagogical department, following strictly in its activities the teachings of MarxismLeninism […] provides high-level political and professional training”14 The StB and VB faculties started their classes, too, in the hitherto premises of the Ministry of Interior, which were located at Hybernská 7 at New Town, Prague. Also, accommodation and lecturing premises in Dolní Břežany Chateau near Prague’s southern border were established.15 The OSH faculty, transformed from the hitherto Holešov-located staff college of the Border Guard, started to operate altogether independently.16 At the same time construction of a new compound was under preparation as the described location was only an interim solution. After preliminaries a locality in Prague’s quarter of Lhotka17 was selected, where the compound of the current Police Academy was later erected. Studying at VŠ SNB had its specifics, of course. Its basic feature was the fact that an applicant, upon being admitted, was assigned to the study by a cadre decree issued by the Minister of Interior, i.e. he was subordinated to the school chief just like other members in the line of duty. It was thus a purely military regime, which also entailed prioritizing full-time study connected with boarding-school accommodation. At the 12 ABS, VŠ SNB faculty, file 13, unsorted, delimitation agreement between PF UK and VŠ SNB, 1974. 13 Ibid, decree issued by the Minister of Interior, Czechoslovak Socialist Republic, 27/8/1974. 14 Ibid. 15 Ibid, draft resolution issued by the College of the Minister of Interior, Czechoslovak Socialist Republic, 1973. 16 Ibid, decree issued by the Minister of Interior, Czechoslovak Socialist Republic, 27/8/1974. 17 Ibid, Information on Construction of the New VŠ SNB Compound, 19/12/1973. 80 WISOHIM/ESHP 20 same time the school-attending members were receiving standard service income, maintaining the dispatching service status in the first year and being assumed directly by VŠ SNB in the subsequent years. Starting the winter semester classes on September 1 and the holidays as late as on August 1 comes across as peculiar. On the other hand, it is understandable as classes attendance was not meant to differ from standard practice of a profession, i.e. the holidays were a regular four-week vacation.18 The study itself was defined by a curriculum approved by the Minister of Interior. In all its forms (both full-time and external study) the schooling lasted five years. It was not to exceed 30 hours per week, which did not include physical education, and all lectures, seminars and trainings took place in the day-time employment regime, i.e. they were mandatory. Excusing a student for one day fell within the year chief’s authority, excusing them for a longer period had to be approved by the faculty chief’s order. It is evident that students’ study and leisure activities as a whole were organized in a military manner. In addition, a fixed daily regime was “livened up” by obligatory musters of the school years every Monday at 8:50 a.m. and musters of the school years in order of individual study groups every Tuesday from 7 a.m., followed by listening to a recent political piece of news on Wednesday morning and by announcement of commands on Thursday before classes. Saturday was reserved for extra “voluntarily mandatory” activities within the curriculum. Fulfilment of prescribed duties and organization of other leisure activities were supervised by a caucus of school-year officials appointed by the faculty dean from among students and was of the following makeup: — School-Year Chief, — School-Year Deputy Chief for Political and Educational Activities, — School-Year Chief Assistant, — Study Group Chief, — Study Group Chief Assistant.19 Different rules applied for the members rounding off their education in service. The length of their study was identical, i.e. five years, but classes took on the form of an annual month-long education camp of 192 hours per school year, including consultations. Self-study preparation was expected,20 which is, however, a purely theoretical expectation and its practical pursuance may be justifiably doubted. Likewise, in their phrasing, the quoted methodical instructions arouse reasonable fears of what were the students’ real qualifications for obtaining a higher-education diploma: “In order to create new regime habits, it is very important to specify intervals in which the independent work will be taking place, and to work on an individual study plan. Based on one’s own experience and newly acquired knowledge, to determine the most appropri18 ABS, VŠ SNB faculty, file 14, draft Study Rules of VŠ SNB; draft Study Regulations of VŠ SNB. 19 ABS, VŠ SNB faculty, file 3, Instructions for Full-Time Students at the Faculty of Public Security Service, 1982. 20 Ibid, Methodical Instructions for Studying in the Line of Duty, Faculty of Public Security Service, 1982. ONdŘEJ HladÍK 81 ate daytime period for studying demanding (completely new) subjects (literature), as well as the period for the subjects (literature) that are easier, better known and more frequently repeated.”21 The indicated issue would definitely deserve attention but it does exceed the scope of this article, which is a mere summary of the most important information, and may thus be understood as a kind of introduction to the theme. A study dealing with establishment and activities of an advanced school may not ignore its works published, either. Naturally, a range of textbooks were being published, of which e.g. one of the results of the work by the Department of Peno logy may be mentioned: in 1982 the teaching aid titled Soviet Correctional and Labour Legislation and Imprisonment in the USSR [Sovětské nápravně pracovní zákonodárství a výkon soudních trestů v SSSR] was created.22 From its pages the dichotomy accompanying VŠ SNB for the entire period of its existence is well noticeable. On the one hand, the book contains extensive ideological introductory parts, bringing information on the leading role of the Communist Party and on the beneficial effect of taking over knowledge from the Soviet Union and a due analysis of treating imprisonment: “The basic principles of the Soviet correctional labour policy were formulated by V. I. Lenin, who presented reasons for the necessity to suppress resistance on the part of overthrown exploitative and other forces hostile to the Soviet state, the necessity to punish them and to exert educative influence on them, the necessity to “correct the corrigible”, through various means.”23 At the same time, the book brings a very detailed and factually precise paper analyzing the correctional education system in the USSR, although, it must be added, from a purely theoretical perspective. The text did not explore its practical aspect. Moreover, it was labelled curtly “For Internal Needs Only“, i.e. disseminating ideas of this nature, although of Soviet origin, publicly appeared undesirable. Nevertheless, the indicated discrepancy consisting in distribution of high-quality expert information within a profoundly dogmatic institution, where primarily ideological information could be expected, is well noticeable. The collection issued by VŠ SNB, titled Security Theory and Practice [Bezpečnostní teorie a praxe] and published since 1981, is written in the same spirit, as it contains not only vague papers of purely political nature, such as Leading Role of the Working Class and Participation in Management [Vedoucí úloha dělnické třídy a účast na řízení],24 but also highly specialized texts focused on the aforementioned criminalistics, such as Criminalistic Relevance of Examining Shooting on an Obstacle and of Examining Bullet Deformation [Kriminalistický význam skúmania streľby na prekážke a skúmania deformácie strely].25 It may be stated that, as far this publication is concerned, the issue 21 Ibid. 22 Petr Pitro, Sovětské nápravně pracovní zákonodárství a výkon soudních trestů v SSSR, Praha 1982. 23 Ibid, p. 8. 24 Svatopluk Minařík, Vedoucí úloha dělnické třídy a účast na řízení, Bezpečnostní teorie a praxe, year IX, No. 1, Praha 1989, pp. 5–13. 25 Bohumil Planka — Ľudovít Lehošťák, Kriminalistický význam skúmania streľby na prekážke a skúmania deformácie strely, Bezpečnostní teorie a praxe, year IX, No. 1, Praha 1989, pp. 166–172. 82 WISOHIM/ESHP 20 is even more apparent as it is not strictly an analysis of Soviet experience, even if elaborated in a high-quality manner, which was, by definition, desirable, but results of expert research. DEPARTMENT OF PENOLOGY So much for VŠ SNB as a whole and let us now focus directly on the study of penology. The department was established in 1979 within the VB faculty, titled “Department of Correctional Education” at the time, completing thus the plans which first appeared when the entire school was being founded, i.e. the plans to create a department focused directly on prison service issues. As regards the aforementioned 1981 name change, it must be added that it was a merely formal modification, which brought no significant changes. It is worth noting that the texts explaining reasons for its establishment feature formulations on the connection of research and practice identical to those of the early 1970s, the only change consisting in the fact that the declaration about increasing the efficiency of the fight against crime on the basis of scientific knowledge was supplemented with the necessity “to increase the efficiency of imprisonment and the role of the increase in coordinated fight against crime”.26 Headed by the chief pplk. PhDr. Emil Vašíček, the key persons of the five-member teaching staff completed a month-long internship in the Soviet Union,27 during which they visited the Academy of the Ministry of Interior of the USSR [Akademie ministerstva vnitra SSSR] in Moscow, the Advanced School of the Ministry of Interior in Ryazan [Rjazaňská vysoká škola ministerstva vnitra], two corrective labour colonies in the Yaroslavl Oblast, the All-Union Scientific and Research Institute of the Ministry of Interior of the USSR [Všesvazový vědeckovýzkumný institut MV SSSR] in Moscow and the All-Union Institute for Enhancing Qualifications of Correctional Labour Facilities Managers of the Ministry of the Interior of the USSR [Všesvazový institut pro zvyšování kvalifikace vedoucích pracovníků nápravně pracovních zařízení MV SSSR] in Domodedovo.28 This fact points to persistence of the practice, in existence from the 1950s, of schooling security corps officials in the USSR. The reason was the necessity to meet the nomenklatura requirements linked with promotion, which could not be implemented in Czechoslovakia of that time until the establishment of VŠ SNB. The official goal of the said visit by the Department of Penology staff was to absorb experience and establish a partnership, which was supposed to be beneficial for activities of the newly established department. Given the quality of the practical aspect of imprisonment, this was mere rhetoric, widely used at the time, which was indicated by the Soviet officials’ reactions on the real conditions in the Czechoslovak correctional education institutions — which is, however, nothing surprising as this 26 Emil Vašíček — Stanislav Nečas, Katedra nápravné výchovy na vysoké škole SNB, Zpravodaj SNV ČSR, December 1979, p. 10. 27 At the beginning, the staff also consisted of the deputy chief pplk. JUDr. Jozef Mikloško, kpt. Petr Pitro, npor. Jozef Dieneš, por. Stanislav Nečas. 28 Emil Vašíček — Stanislav Nečas, Katedra nápravné výchovy…, p. 10. ONdŘEJ HladÍK 83 situation replicates exactly the practice habitual in many fields of human activities. Nevertheless, theoretical knowledge from research conducted by often secret scientific departments in the USSR may not be underestimated. In spite of the fact that the students clearly headed towards the Party ideology — this orientation was imposed on them to the full e.g. within the school-wide Department of Marxism-Leninism —, the Department of Penology provided them with quite a decent professional theoretical basis (if they were interested), although always backed up with the experience from Soviet professional schools. Specialization on the prison service issues included six basic subjects, which shall be briefly presented in the following paragraphs: BaSIcS Of PENITENTIaRy STUdIES As indicated by the title, students were acquainted with penology as a discipline dealing with imprisonment. Introductory lectures summarized its theoretical basis, taking into account retributive and preventive functions of detention. Immanuel Kant’s and Georg Wilhelm Hegel’s views were to be analyzed, in particular with regard to the criticism aimed at them by Marx and Engels. An analysis of imprisonment issues in “bourgeois penological theories” followed, again, of course, on the basis of Marxism (it is thus apparent that literature of western origin was also available at VŠ SNB). All this was completed with a treatise on the function of a sentence in the socialist society. This course had to be attended as a proseminar of sorts, followed up by other subjects.29 PENITENTIaRy laW The subject focused on legal issues of imprisonment, namely on analyzing overarching legal norms, their interpretation and application. An ideological and political explanation of the methodology applied by the discipline was not omitted, either, with specifics of correctional education institutions environment and of correctional education work always taken into account. The subject also formed part of scientific and research projects focused on examining fulfilment of imprisonment objectives. PENITENTIaRy PSycHOlOgy The subject was taught in the second year of the study and preceded Penitentiary Pedagogy. It aimed to teach students to assess psychological phenomena and processes in imprisonment environment, and included an effort to apply the knowledge in practice. Therefore, psychological diagnostics, together with addressing the issues associated with the impact that deprivation of free movement has on convicts’ psyche, became an indispensable part of the subject. Also, lectures on individual and group psychological methods and significance of expert classification of convicts for penitentiary practice were conducted. 29 The follow-up subjects were “Penitentiary Pedagogy and Correctional Education Activities” and “Penitentiary Psychology“. 90 WISOHIM/ESHP 20 Between 1959 and 1962 Novák attended a secondary school at his domicile and then enrolled at the Faculty of Education in Hradec Králové. Already as a graduate teacher he worked at the Children’s Home in Nechanice for one year and in 1967 started his compulsory military service at the division of the Ministry of Interior No. 2220 Prague. Upon returning to civilian life, he started teaching at the Elementary School in Stračov (district Hradec Králové), where he was appointed director in 1972. In February 1974 he was adopted as a CPC candidate and in June of that year he assumed a teaching post at NVÚ Valdice, but only after completing a two-week internship at NVÚ Heřmanice. Before long, in October 1974, he was appointed leader of the Starting Department and passed a group counselling training. At the end of the year he started studying a two-year postgraduate course for SNV members. Within his work in Valdice he received very positive evaluations from his superiors, and since December 1976 he thus held the post of secretary of the advisory board to the division chief, his task being to process materials discussed at meetings. In 1979 he obtained the division chief’s approval to apply for a doctoral examination and was assigned to cadre reserves, to the post of the NVČ department deputy chief. During his work in Valdice, he was also active in public offices, serving, among others, as a vice-chairman of the 1st company organization of the CPC, taught political preparation for SNV members and chaired the Pedagogical and Psychological Section of the District Committee of the Socialist Academy in Jičín. In spite of apparent career advancement, he terminated his service at one of the best-known Czech prisons in 1980 when he started at VŠ SNB as a senior teacher at the Department of Correctional Education and, before long, passed an exam at the Staff College of SNB. In 1983 he also commenced his external study at the Academy of the Ministry of Interior of the USSR in Moscow, aimed at achieving research assistantship, but left it prematurely on his own request in 1985 and attempted to transfer to the 5th Administration of the Federal Ministry of Interior. He ended up withdrawing his transfer application and remained assistant professor at VŠ SNB. He reattempted to receive the CSc. degree within his permanent workplace in 1987. K. Novák’s promotions comprised the following ranks: second lieutenant [podporučík, 1974], lieutenant [poručík, 1975], first lieutenant [nadporučík, 1978], captain [kapitán, 1981], major [major, 1986]. He was also awarded the badge Military Academy Graduate (1975), Medal for Service to the Homeland (1982) and Decoration for Merit in Defence of the Homeland (1986).38 dOc. PHdR. EMIl vaŠÍČEK, cSc. Born on January 29, 1931 in Jestřábí (district Uherské Hradiště) to the family of Jan Vašíček, a farmer in possession of 9 hectares of land. His mother Františka also worked on the farm, and was thus classified as a housewife. E. Vašíček had five siblings, of which four half-siblings. In 1946 they moved to Skorošice (district Jeseník) to a farmstead of 8 hectares. From 1950 he worked as a member of the board of the 38 ABS, K. Novák’s personnel file, arch. No. 2115. ONdŘEJ HladÍK 91 collective farm Skorošice (3rd type) and, upon completing the District and Regional Political School [okresní a krajská politická škola], he held the office of secretary for village groups of the Regional Committee of the Czechoslovak Union of Youth Olomouc. Given his age, he became a CPC member relatively early, applying on February 15, 1948. In 1950 he worked briefly at the Youth Construction in Ostrava and from September 1951 he started studying at the School for Young Officers [Škola důstojnického dorostu] in Nový Jičín because he considered the career of a professional soldier. In 1952 he transferred to the Artillery School in Hranice and, upon completing it in 1955, he continued to work in Hranice, first as a commanding officer of the training division’s firing squad, later as the second-in-command for political affairs at the training division’s 2nd firing battery and afterwards at the school’s political department. Then he transferred to the headquarters of the 6th artillery division and did his service in Holešov. In 1959, on his own request, he transferred to the Internal Guard of the Ministry of Interior [Vnitřní stráž ministerstva vnitra] and was assigned as a deputy for political matters to the 3rd battalion, 6th brigade, where he was active again at Party posts, which is also indicated by his membership in the caucus of the District Committee of the CPC. In 1964 he was transferred to the Correctional Facilities Administration of the Ministry of Interior [Správa nápravných zařízení MV] where he served as a senior officer at the envisaged teaching post with the division at the Correctional Facility of the Ministry of Interior Příbram-Bytíz. Allegedly, a year later he started his studies at the Department of Psychology, Faculty of Arts, Charles University. The form of his acquired education is not altogether clear, though, as in certain documents stored in his personnel file feature the information that he only passed a three-year psychology course. On the other hand, a 1975 certificate confirming his passing a doctoral examination is available. Early in 1968 he left Příbram, where his family stayed on temporarily, and started at the SNV administration in Prague as a senior officer — NVČ division specialist. In the complicated period of August 1968, he vocalized his opinions actively in articles taking the side of the “proletarian internationalism”. He also argued against transferring prison service back under the authority of the Ministry of Justice, and left thus for a teaching post at the Professional School of the Ministry of Interior in Prague-Vršovice where, in his own words, he “took active part in political work and revealing right-wing forces”.39 In October 1969, however, in spite of having also considered transferring to the 2nd Administration of the Ministry of Interior, he had himself transferred back to SNV — not to the ordinary officer position but to the office of the NVČ department chief of the SNV administration in Prague. He held the said office until 1979 when he accepted the post of the chief of the newly established Department of Correctional Education, VŠ SNB, where in 1981 he also defended successfully his dissertation in the form of a series of published articles and conceptual materials in the so-called public defence and in 1983 he received a senior lectureship. Despite continuing to be characterized as politically and 39 ABS, E. Vašíček’s personnel file. 92 WISOHIM/ESHP 20 professionally conscious and highly qualified, his service evaluation from June 1984 included criticism aimed at his repetitive transgression of his powers, inconsistent observance of service regulations and excessive consumption of alcohol, which is why his superiors found him unfit for his hitherto office. He objected by addressing an appeal to the VŠ SNB chief, in which he described the said evaluation as calculated and biased. In December of that year, the issue was discussed by a special commission, which found the evaluation findings to be justified, and on December 15, 1984 E. Vašíček was thus removed from office and transferred to the Institute of Criminology and Social Prevention [Ústav kriminologie a sociální prevence], VŠ SNB, after which, in September 1985, he applied for discharge from SNB, arguing that he reached the retirement age. Promoted to the following ranks: lieutenant [poručík, 1955], first lieutenant [nadporučík, 1958], captain [kapitán, 1962], major [major, 1968], lieutenant colonel [podplukovník, 1975], colonel [plukovník, 1982]. Decorations: Medal for Service to the Homeland (1954), Decoration for Merit in Defence of the Homeland (1970), Commemorative Medal for the 50th Anniversary of Establishment of the CPC (1971), Commemorative Medal for the 25th Anniversary of Victorious February (1973), Commemorative Medal for the 25th Anniversary of Socialization of Agriculture (1974), Commemorative Medal for the 30th Anniversary of Liberation (1975), a Badge of Honour of the Union of the Czechoslovak-Soviet Friendship, 1st Degree (1975), a Badge of Honour of the National Security Corps (1981), Medal of the National Security Corps (1982).40 40 Ibid. ONdŘEJ HladÍK 93 Sekretariát fakulty Department of Criminalistics Department of Criminalistics Department of Criminalistic Technology Department of Criminalistic Methods Department of Forensic Disciplines and Laboratories Division of Security Technology of the Public Security Service Department of Theory and Methodology of Operative and Searching Activities Department of Security Technology Department of Operative and Searching Activities Department of Organization and Services of Management of Public Security Service Department of Criminal Service Department of Protecting Public Order Department of Transport Service Department of Administrative Work and Mechanization Division of Transport Service Department of Fight against Crime Department of Using Public in Fight against Crime Department of Prevention 1st and 2nd year Chief 1st and 2nd year 3rd and 4th year Chief 3rd and 4th year Department of Penology (since 1979) Chief Structure of the Faculty of the Public Security Service, Advanced School of the National Security Corps