Source: https://etickakomisecr.cz/en/agency/
Timestamp: 2019-04-25 19:41:13+00:00

Document:
The Ethics Commission awarded the Member Certificate of the Anti-Communist Resistance and Opposition for active participation within the so-called “Stočes Group", whose members fought against communism in Czechoslovakia in years 1948-1949, by which he fulfilled the characteristics of the form of anti-communist resistance and opposition according to § 3, par. 3 of the Act No. 262/2011 Coll.
Ing. Jaroslav Horyna, born 2nd August 1924, was in September 1949 accused of high treason and in the ruling of the State Court in Prague of 21st October 1949 File No. Or I 1189/49 in the process with “Ladislav Stočes and others“ he was found guilty of the crime of association against the state according to § 2 par. 3 of the Act No. 231/1948 Coll. and sentenced to 4 years in a high security prison. The listed ruling also imposed a fine of 100 000 CZK, confiscation of half of Jaroslav Horyna's property and the loss of honorary civil rights for three years. Jaroslav Horyna served his sentence in the mine in Vinařice and in Jáchymov.
Ing. Horyna was judged within the so-called “Stočes Trial", which was a trial with the members of former members of the youth Czechoslovak National-Socialist Party. As the communist regime tried to discredit this party in a trial with its leading representatives with Dr. Milada Horáková at the forefront, the regime also made an effort to discredit the then new generation of this party. During the trial 33 persons were found guilty with many of them given harsh sentences. The activities of the “Stočes Group" lay, according to the ruling and the investigation file, in intelligence activities (gathering of information) and providing help to persons crossing the border by facilitating contacts to exile functionaries of the former Czechoslovak National-Socialist Party abroad.
Ing. Jaroslav Horyna joined the Czechoslovak National-Socialist Party in June 1945, in autumn 1946 he was elected Chair of the National-Socialist Youth in Prague VIII. This made him automatically a member of the Committee of the Prague Region Youth, where he met Ladislav Stočes. Ing. Jaroslav Horyna accepted the offer of Stočes, the main organizer of the group, to cooperate with the group in June/July 1948. Both men had regular conspiratorial meetings, in the last three months prior to their arrest they met once a week at the St. Jacob Church in Prague 1. The last meeting of the two men should have occurred one week before their arrest. Ing. Jaroslav Horyna must have been aware from the start of his contacts with Stočes that this activity is illegal and recruited at least 4 persons into this illegal group. The designation of Jaroslav Horyna within this group was “8 D 1".
With regard to the above listed the Ethics Commission considers proven that the activities of Jaroslav Horyna, described in his application for awarding a Member Certificate of the Anti-Communist Resistance and Opposition as well as in the ruling of the State Court in Prague of 21st October 1949, File No. Or I 1189/49 in which he was found guilty of the crime of association against the state according to § 2 par. 3 of the Act No. 231/1948 Coll. and sentenced to 4 years in a high security prison and the confiscation of half of Jaroslav Horyna's property, fulfills the characteristics of the form of anti-communist resistance and opposition according to § 3, par. 3 of the Act No. 262/2011 Coll. as a follow-up to provision §2 b) of the Act No. 262/2011 Coll., as this constitutes active participation in an organization or group, whose members fought against the communist regime by means listed in this provision, with the aim to remove, significantly weaken or erode or otherwise harm the communist totalitarian authority in Czechoslovakia and renew freedom and democracy. The Ethics Commission refuses to hold against Ing. Jaroslav Horyna the fact that he did not reveal the members of his former group.
The Ethics Commission does not agree with the opinion of the Ministry that the fact, that the “Stočes Group" had been infiltrated by StB shortly after its establishment, could be held against Ing. Jaroslav Horyna, as the Ministry did in the justification of its decision. The Ethics Commission is of the opinion that this fact itself cannot have an influence on the subjective efforts and attitudes of the individual group members, who performed their activities within the group in good faith that they are fighting the communist establishment, as was the case of Ing. Jaroslav Horyna.
The Ethics Commission would like to appreciate the highly brave and exemplary attitudes of Ing. Jaroslav Horyna during his investigation by StB, his sentence and after his release, particularly the fact that he did not reveal the names of his collaborators to the StB and all through the duration of the communist regime remained true to the ideals for which he was imprisoned.
The Ethics Commission awarded the Member Certificate of the Anti-Communist Resistance and Opposition for public attitudes against collectivization in the Nížkov municipality in 1963, by which he fulfilled the characteristics of the form of anti-communist resistance and opposition according to § 3, par. 4 of the Act No. 262/2011 Coll.
Jan Kučera stood out against the economic-technical adjustment of estates in the Nížkov municipality (or generally against the collectivization of the country) and his actions, which were preceded by the persuasion of local peasants and farmers by local Communist Party members to submit to the economic-technical adjustment of estates and collectivization, culminated on 25th September 1953, when he verbally attacked the chairman of the local JZD (Standard Agrarian Cooperative), who distributed manure to the estates, which belonged to the family of Jan Kučera and which were included into the JZD against the will of the family. For this act Jan Kučera was found guilty, according to the court ruling, that he intentionally endangered the public interest in the Nížkov municipality in the Žďár nad Sázavou district during the year 1953 until 22nd September 1953 by actions hostile to the people's democratic social order of the republic by trying to evoke hostile sentiments among the inhabitants of Nížkov against the economic-technical adjustment of estates and on 22nd September 1953 verbally attacked the JZD chairman Josef Marek. He thus committed a crime of hostile action against the Republic according to §129 of the Criminal Code and was sentenced to 1 year in prison. As further follows from the from the ruling the listed actions of Jan Kučera “had the harmful effect that at the end of September 1953 other farmers, particularly the richer villagers, did not respect the economic-technical adjustment of estates and sowed seeds on their former estates, which to a large extent ruined the aim of collectivization, which should have implemented the three-hectare sowing system in the whole municipality. The accused fully understood these effects and directly planned them and therefore his speeches addressed to the inhabitants of Nížkov that his family will continue to sow on their lands and statements addressed to the witness Marek fulfills all characteristics of the crime of hostile action against the Republic."
Jan Kučera with his public opinions in 1953 stood out directly, obviously and demonstrably against the violent and nonsensical economic-technical adjustment of estates in Nížkov and against collectivization and thus as a result stood out against the communist regime, who used various means to achieve its goals (classless society, socialization of the country etc.), to which also belongs the economic-technical adjustment of estates or collectivization.
The Ethics Commission also stressed in its decision that the actions of the proceedings participant was motivated by a legitimate effort to protect the family estates against its illegal and unjust usurpation and used fully democratic means to achieve this. The Ethics Commission commends such attitude even in accordance with its constant decision-making practice.
The Ethics Commission awarded the Member Certificate of the Anti-Communist Resistance and Opposition of Pavel Hanč, born 24th August 1926, deceased 20th February 2007, to his wife Ms Hana Hančová, for Pavel Hanč's participation in the activities of the Catholic Action Movement aimed against the communist regime in Czechoslovakia in the years 1948-1953, which fulfill the characteristics of the form of anti-communist resistance and opposition according to § 3, par. 3 together with §3 par. 2 a) and b) of the Act No. 262/2011 Coll.
Pavel Hanč was born on 24th August 1926, after the World War II. he started his studies at the Pedagogical Faculty of the Charles University in Prague, was an active member of the Catholic Action Movement since 1947, when he was recruited for the movement by his fellow student Milada Kloubková. He took an oath in the St. Vaclav Chapel at the Prague Castle before the leader of the Catholic Action Mr. Alexander Heilder. After that he actively participated in the circle of the Catholic Action (striving to achieve its goals) within the Czech Academic League at the Pedagogical Faculty, which was led by Milada Kloubková. Pavel Hanč led this circle himself several times until 1949, i. e. even after 25th February 1948. He was among the circle's most active members, participated in numerous activities related to the circle's operation (e.g. the organization of the mass in the St. Salvator Church, religious courses, balls, agape and other social events).
Pavel Hanč recruited other members for the Catholic Action and actively distributed among them literature, which was not officially prohibited until the fallout between the catholic church and the communist regime in June 1949 and was “publicly" available; however it was obviously and undoubtedly anti-communist. In the years 1948 and 1949 Pavel Hanč distributed the pastoral lists, encyclicals of Pius XI., which are obviously anti-communist and also e.g. cyclostyled translations of books “Christian Humanism" by Jacques Maritain, “Christian Realism and Dialectic Materialism" by Dominik Pecka, Artur Pavelka and Bohdan Chudoba and “Christianity and Communism" by L. J. Lebret, the contents of which is also obviously anti-communist. The books imply that the “Christian humanism", which is here compared with the Marxist materialism and communism and whose aim is, in contemporary words, the development of freedom and democracy, is not only an ideological, religious but also a real political goal, which should be realized.
By the listed actions from the years 1948 and 1949 Pavel Hanč fulfilled the form of the anti-communist resistance and opposition stipulated in §3 par. 2 a) of the Act No. 262/2011 Coll., which lies in the distribution of documents or public statements aimed directly or indirectly to renew freedom and democracy or to weaken the communist regime, whereas by performing this activity he actively participated in the operation of the Catholic Action within the Czech Academic League.
Pavel Hanč also knowingly lent his flat for meetings of the already illegal catholic movement (Family within the Catholic Action), i. e. even in 1951 and 1952. This proves that he helped the already obviously illegal movement of the Catholic Action (although he served the compulsory military service at that time), when he enabled the meetings to take place at his flat. During the proceedings it was also proved that in 1953 (during his military service) he contacted Karel Novák and Milada Kloubková, whom he knew to be active within the Catholic Action. Furthermore it is clear that he agreed with Milada Kloubková's proposal that it is necessary to financially support families of persons from the Catholic Action, who were arrested, and supported this request financially as well.
By these actions Pavel Hanč fulfilled the form of the anti-communist resistance and opposition stipulated in §3 par. 2 b) of the Act No. 262/2011 Coll., which lies in provable anti-communist activity aimed directly or indirectly to renew freedom and democracy or to weaken the communist regime.
Pavel Hanč was arrested for these actions in 1953 and in a ruling of the Regional Court in Prague of 2nd June 1954 in the trial of “Jitka Malíková and others“ he was found guilty of the crime of association against the Republic according to § 80 par. 1 of the Criminal Code No. 86/1950 Coll. and sentenced to 4 years in prison and other penalties. After being released from his sentence he could not return to his occupation as a teacher and worked as a clerk.
Pavel Hanč died in 2007. The request for the award of the Member Certificate of the Anti-Communist Resistance and Opposition was submitted by his wife Hana Hančová.
The Ethics Commission awarded the Member Certificate of the Anti-Communist Resistance and Opposition to Josef Kozák for public attitudes against collectivization by which he continuously demonstrated his opposition to collectivization of the country and stood out to defend the vested right to own property and to handle it freely in Hnanice in the Trutnov district from 1949, particularly from 1951 to 1952, for which he was severely punished, by which he fulfilled the characteristics of the form of anti-communist resistance and opposition according to § 3, par. 4 of the Act No. 262/2011 Coll.
Josef Kozák was the biggest private farmer in Hnanice, Trutnov, with a farming area of ca. 26 hectares, which he inherited from his father in 1949. The files state that Josef Kozák was a leading figure among the farmers in Hnanice and that the majority of them followed his attitudes and opinions. This fact follows from the testimony of Karel Kozák, chairman of the local Communist Party organization of 10th October 1952, which reads: “if the young Kozák would show good faith, Hnanice could have had a JZD already in 1950, as he was an economic driving force, which the whole village would have followed. However he was aware of his position and therefore the creation of a JZD in Hnanice had been impeded." This fact is also proved in the testimony of Josef Šálek, a secretary of the local municipal authority, of the same day, where he describes the circumstances of the establishment of the JZD in Hnanice. This testimony clearly shows that all other private farmers in Hnanice came to Josef Kozák for counsel regarding the creation of the JZD and even when it became difficult and even impossible to keep his farm, they advocated his acceptance into the JZD. The fact, that the creation of the JZD in Hnanice had been problematic and impeded follows also from the surviving records of the Hnanice municipal authority from 1952. The Ethics Commission regards the testimony of Josef Kozák of 10th October 1952 as a key evidence of his negative public attitudes to collectivization not only regarding the already cited testimony, but also due to other facts following from this testimony, which prove that Josef Kozák demonstrated his attitude in other ways as well.
The Ethics Commissions considers proven that Josef Kozák demonstrated quite obviously his attitude against collectivization and the creation of JZD Hnanice by resigning from the so-called electric plant collective, which associated all electricity purchasers “a priori" because it was planned that these collectives would be integrated into the JZD, as his resignation clearly showed that he does not agree with the collective ownership and forced collectivization of the country. The Ethics Commission also considers proven that Josef Kozák stood out against the economic-technical adjustment of estates performed in Hnanice, when he did not agree with it and did not sign the statement of new plot allocation (September/October 1952), because he was the most injured party in this adjustment (this can be deduced from the fact that Josef Kozák's lands were the most lucrative in the municipality and therefore the lands that were newly assigned to him could not have been better, but exactly the opposite). The files also show that Josef Kozák did not respect the statement of new plot allocation in the way that he went with his cart to work on his former lands (regarded as collective farmland in the interrogation files) immediately after that.
The ruling of the District Court in Turnov of 6th July 1952, File No. T 108/52 found Josef Kozák guilty of endangering the unified economic plan and negligence according to § 135, par. 1 of the Criminal Code and sentenced him to 5 months in prison and a financial penalty of 20 000 CZK, in case of the amount being irrecoverable, a further alternative sentence of 2 months in prison should have been imposed. During his prison sentence, which started on 3th October 1952, he had been prosecuted again and in the ruling of the District Court in Turnov of 25th November 1952, File No. T 154/52-34 he was found guilty of sabotage according to § 85 par. 1 a) of the Criminal Code and sentenced to additional 15 months in prison, furthermore all his property was confiscated in favour of the state, he was prohibited from living in the Turnov district forever and the ruling was to be made public. The People's Court in Turnov in its ruling of 15th September 1953, File No. T 154/52-113, with regard to the presidential amnesty, which applied to the crime according to § 135 par. 1 of the Criminal Code, imposed a 15-month sentence for the remaining crime on Josef Kozák, who was serving his sentence at that time. The other punishments, imposed on Josef Kozák by the ruling of 25th November 1952, File No. T 154/52-34, were imposed again. As follows from the files, Josef Kozák was “judged" once before by the “criminal investigation commission" of the District National Authority in Turnov on 18th July 1952 for insufficient fulfillment or lack thereof of supply duties and fined 20 000 CZK.
The listed information shows that Josef Kozák obviously actively (even though impliedly) influenced other private farmers in Hnanice in their attitudes towards collectivization, as the mass joining of the JZD in Hnanice occurred only in September 1952, i.e. after his conviction for endangering of the unified economic plan in August 1952 and shortly before the start of his sentence. It is also possible to deduce from the files that Josef Kozák's conviction for sabotage was clearly calculated by the regime with the motivation to isolate him from the other private farmers and inhabitants of Hnanice, whom he could otherwise continue to influence and also to illegally confiscate his property. This is further evidenced by the sentences imposed by the District Court in Turnov in its ruling of 25th November 1952, File No. T 154/52-34, in which he was found guilty of sabotage according to § 85 par. 1 a) of the Criminal Code. Whether it was the additional 15 months in prison (clearly motivated by the effort to enable the settling of the newly formed JZD in the municipality, which could have been thwarted after his return from the 5 month sentence), but especially the very harsh punishment of “confiscation of all his property in favour of the state", “prohibition from living in the Turnov district forever" as well as the “order to make the ruling public". The regime would not use these types of punishments if it did not want to try to scare other inhabitants of Hnanice and surrounding villages, particularly other private farmers, and deter them from attitudes similar to those of Josef Kozák. These facts also allow for indirect deduction that for people around him Josef Kozák was undoubtedly a figure of authority not only objectively able to influence others with his attitudes, but that he has actively done so. Although in this case the public attitudes were not demonstrated directly in a verbal form, it is possible to clearly observe his public attitudes from his actions. Also, the farm, registry No. 3 in Hnanice, which was owned by Josef Kozák, was the only confiscated property in the municipality. The confiscated farm of the forcefully evicted Josef Kozák and his family then served as a foundation of the JZD Hnanice.
With regard to the above listed information the Ethics Commission considers proven that Josef Kozák publicly demonstrated his opinions against collectivization in Hnanice, Turnov, by which he consistently from 1949, particularly from 1951 until his imprisonment in 1952, opposed the collectivization and thus the communist regime in Czechoslovakia and stood out for the vested right to own and freely handle property and that he was harshly punished for these actions, both by his prison sentence and the forced eviction of him and his family from Hnanice. By these actions Josef Kozák fulfilled the form of the anti-communist resistance and opposition stipulated in §3 par. 4) in connection to § 2 b) of the Act No. 262/2011 Coll. This is not changed by the fact that he was obviously purposefully sentenced for sabotage. The Ethics Commission must also state that by his actions in the years from 1949 to 1952 Josef Kozák protected not only his ownership rights or his property, but mainly the institute of ownership rights connected to personal independence on the system, as one of the basic pillars of the democratic law state and by his example he encouraged other farmers to put up resistance, whereas he did not commit any undemocratic action. The Ethics Commission states that Josef Kozák's attitudes were of a public nature and in their substance were direct, obvious and provable acts of opposition to communism.
Obiter dictum outside the assessment of the actions of Josef Kozák in relation to the Act No. 262/2011 Coll., the Ethics Commission states that the particularly harsh actions against the family of Josef Kozák, not only their forced eviction but also the fact that they could not even take their personal belongings with them, which was against the law even at that time, shows obvious heartlessness of the communist regime not only towards those, who were found guilty for whatever reason, but also towards those who did not transgressed against it and even could not offend it in any way.
The Ethics Commission awarded the Member Certificate of the Anti-Communist Resistance and Opposition to Otakar Vinklář (born 27th December 1930) for his attempt to cross the national borders of Czechoslovakia together with others in a military aircraft in 1953 in order to participate in anti-communist opposition and resistance abroad, by which he fulfilled the characteristics of the form of anti-communist resistance and opposition according to § 3, par. 1 of the Act No. 262/2011 Coll.
In 1951 Otakar Vinklář completed his studies at the military school and served in the rank of second lieutenant as a navigator of the aircraft of the 1st squadron of the 1st airborne transport regiment Prague – Kbely. In 1953 he provably became a member of a group, which intended to cross the national boarded in an aircraft to Germany in order to fight communism abroad. It does not affect this fact that prior to their attempt to cross the border the members of the group were arrested, sentenced to several years in prison, had their property confiscated and their civil rights revoked. Mr. Otakar Vinklář was discharged from the military in 1954, was stripped of his rank and released into reserve.
The Ethics Commission considers proven that Mr. Otakar Vinklář was a member of a group, which systematically planned during the second half of 1983 several attempts to cross the Czechoslovak border and whose members intended to join the anti-communist opposition and resistance and with regard to the above stated it is of the opinion that Mr. Otakar Vinklář by his above listed attitudes and actions fulfilled the form of the anti-communist resistance and opposition stipulated in §3 par. 1 in connection to § 2 b) of the Act No. 262/2011 Coll. and therefore changed the decision of the Ministry so that Mr. Otakar Vinklář shall be awarded the Member Certificate of the Anti-Communist Resistance and Opposition.
The Ethics Commission awarded the Member Certificate of the Anti-Communist Resistance and Opposition of Helena Nováková, maiden name Capoušková, born 3rd June 1928, deceased 3rd January 20012, to her son Mr. Čestmír Novák, as Helena Nováková actively participated in the activities of the resistance group “Dr. Edvard Beneš“, which fulfills the characteristics of the form of anti-communist resistance and opposition according to § 3, par. 3 together with §3 par. 3 of the Act No. 262/2011 Coll.
Helena Nováková, born 3rd June 1928,was arrested in July 1950, accused of high treason and found guilty in the ruling of the State Court in Prague of 19th July 1950, File No. OR I/V 62/50-17 according to § 1 par. 1 c) and par 2 of the Act No. 231/48 Coll., and sentenced to 20 years in a high security prison, financial penalty of 10 000 CZK, confiscation of whole property and revocation of civil rights for 10 years. The Supreme Court in Prague in its decision of 23rd May 1951, File No. To V 52/51 partially obliged the appeal of Helena Nováková/Capoušková and the decision of the State Court in Prague was cancelled in the statement of guilt of high treason, which she should have committed by hoarding weapons and ammunition for treasonous purposes and she was acquitted. As a result the disputed ruling was cancelled in the main statement of sentence as well and according to § 1 par. 1 of the Act 231/48 Coll., she was sentenced to 14 years in prison and according to § 47 of this Act a penalty of 20 000 CZK was imposed on her. Based on the presidential amnesty her sentence was reduced to 7 years. She served her sentence in prisons in Hradec Králové and Pardubice.
Helena Nováková was tried in the „Záleský and others" lawsuit, which was related to the “Emil Weiland, Jaroslav Kolín and others" lawsuit. Both lawsuits followed up the trial of “Dr. Milada Horáková and others“. During this trial 31 persons were convicted, many of them sentenced too harsh punishments. The activities of this group should have been based (according to the ruling and investigation files) mainly in the attempt to destroy and disrupt the people's democratic establishment, republic's social and economic systems guaranteed by the Constitution and included “particularly espionage, hoarding of weapons, hiding enemies of the people's democratic establishment and alleged terrorist activities" (planning of attacks on communist representatives, functionaries and planning and execution of sabotages).
The StB and the communist justice constructed a connection between the so-called illegal central, which should have been established by Dr. Milada Horáková based on the instigation by Petr Zenkl and which should have constructed a network of the so-called regional confidantes, who should have created intelligence and disruption organizations in the regions. In the Liberec region these were allegedly Emil Kolín, a former functionary of the Czechoslovak People's Party and Emil Weiland, a Deputy for the former Czechoslovak National-Socialist Party, who should have been connected to Dr. Horáková. These persons should have then recruit others for illegal activities and unify smaller already existing illegal groups, whose existence they suspected. These should have been the organization led by Ivo Baršík and later Jaroslav Stadtherr and the organization led by Bedřich Judytka.
The group tried in the “Záleský and others" lawsuit belonged to the resistance organization led by Bedřich Judytka named “Dr. Edvard Beneš“. Apart from direct members lead by Bedřich Judytka there were two subgroups, one led by František Pálek and the other by Petr Kouba.
The files show that Helena Nováková was a member of the subgroup led by František Pálek, which consisted of several employees of Velveta Varnsdorf, a factory in the Dolní Podluží municipality, namely by František Pálek, Anna Mašková and Jaroslav Rimkevič.
The Ethics Commission considers proven that Helena Nováková knew about the existence of the anti-state group and that in 1949 she provided help to it, namely to František Pálek and Jaroslav Rimkevič, when they were searching for old war bunkers in the forest near Jedlová, i.e. she participated in their search knowing that this should become a hideout for the members of the resistance group in the event that they would be discovered.
The actions of Helena Nováková can be without any doubt judged as active and obviously anti-communist within the resistance group led by Bedřich Judytka, known as “Dr. Edvard Beneš", namely within the subgroup led by František Pálek. The Ethics Commission is of the opinion that with these actions Helena Nováková fulfilled the form of the anti-communist resistance and opposition stipulated in §3 par. 1 in connection to § 2 b) of the Act No. 262/2011 Coll., as it constituted active participation in an organization or group, whose members fought against the communist regime by methods listed in this provision, i.e. namely in the form of an armed or other comparable fight against the communist regime in Czechoslovakia, sabotages or comparable brave deeds performed with the aim to support armed operations against the communist regime in Czechoslovakia with the goal to remove, significantly weaken or disrupt or otherwise harm the communist total power in Czechoslovakia and renew freedom and democracy, whereas by performing this activity Helena Nováková actively participated in the operation of the illegal resistance group “Dr. Edvard Beneš", i.e. actively and knowingly helped a group, whose members fought against the communist regime by methods specified in this provision.
For completeness the Ethics Commission states that it is aware of the fact that part of the activities of the armed resistance group “Dr. Edvard Beneš" created around Bedřich Judytka, Bohuslav Houfek and Josef Záleský, was with high probability provoked by the StB; however this does not weigh against those members of the resistance group, who actively participated in the fight against communism, as it cannot have any influence on subjective efforts and attitudes of individual group members, who acted in good faith, that they are fighting the communist establishment, as was the case of Bedřich Judytka, František Pálek and also Helena Nováková, regardless of the fact that it is possible to doubt the correctness and reasoning of legal qualification of the actions of Helena Nováková by the court at that time (from the point of view of the then establishment) as high treason and the appropriateness of the related prison sentence, which for Helena Nováková was 20 years, then reduced to 14 and she actually served 7 (which was caused by the obvious purpose of the whole trial, i.e. the effort to deal with both imaginary and real enemies of the people's democratic establishment and the effort to scare the public and deter other persons from their intent to put up resistance or opposition against the communist regime in Czechoslovakia or from helping such persons).
Helena Nováková/Capoušková applied for the Member Certificate of the Anti-Communist Resistance and Opposition in December 2011; however she died in January 2012. Her son Čestmír Novák applied for the Member Certificate of the Anti-Communist Resistance and Opposition again in April 2012.
The Ethics Commission awarded the Member Certificate of the Anti-Communist Resistance and Opposition of Jaroslav Petrlík, born 11th April 1915, deceased 31st July 1995, to his wife Stanislava Petrlíková for public attitudes against collectivization by which he continuously demonstrated his opposition to collectivization of the country and stood out to defend the vested right to own property and to handle it freely in the Chlum municipality from 1948 until 1974, despite being repeatedly punished, by which he fulfilled the characteristics of the form of anti-communist resistance and opposition according to § 3, par. 4 of the Act No. 262/2011 Coll.
Mr. Jaroslav Petrlík owned the largest farm in the municipality and worked on his lands alone, without the help of other hired workers and was repeatedly penalized for not meeting the supply obligation that was imposed on him. Penalties for not meeting the supply quota stopped in 1974, when based on Government Resolution No. 50/1955 Coll., on Certain Measures for Ensuring Agrarian Production, his whole farm was confiscated and given to the State Farm in Hlinsko. In the ruling of the People's Court in Hlinsko of 25th June 1958 it is stated that the person in question “does not participate in public life, does not show his political beliefs, but despite that it is obvious that he does not agree with contemporary establishment at all". Mr. Jaroslav Petrlík was convicted several times and sentenced among others to custodial sentence. His public attitudes and opinions, which he demonstrated within his disapproval with the contemporary situation, and which can be evidenced by available documents, are listed in the minutes from the meetings of Local Authority Councils and in the ruling of the People's Court in Hlinsko of 25th June 1958, which states that: "it is obvious from his actions that he does not agree with contemporary establishment at all".
The Ethics Commission must also state that by his actions in the years from 1948 to 1974 Mr. Jaroslav Petrlík protected his property against collectivization and eventually its actual confiscation. He protected not only his ownership rights or his property, but mainly the institute of ownership rights connected to personal independence on the system, as one of the basic pillars of the democratic law state, which follows from the nature of his actions and the sacrifices he repeatedly made because of it, whereas he did not commit any undemocratic action. The Ethics Commission considers proven that Mr. Jaroslav Petrlík's repeatedly, resp. continuously stood out against (held a public opinion) against the forced collectivization of the country. This attitude was obviously continuous and long-term and in terms of its length and related sacrifices unique.
The Ethics Commission is convinced that the actions of Mr. Jaroslav Petrlík can be designated as public political and social attitudes held actively of his own free will, which opposed the onset and sustenance of the communist totalitarian regime and further states that his attitudes were of a public nature and in their substance were direct, obvious and provable acts of opposition to communism. The Ethics Commission is of the opinion that he fulfilled the characteristics of the form of anti-communist resistance and opposition according to § 3, par. 4 of the Act No. 262/2011 Coll.
The Ethics Commission awarded the Member Certificate of the Anti-Communist Resistance and Opposition to Stanislava Petrlíková, born 6th May 1927, for public attitudes against collectivization by in the Chlum municipality from 1948 until 1974 together with her husband Jaroslav Petrlík, by which she fulfilled the characteristics of the form of anti-communist resistance and opposition according to § 3, par. 4 of the Act No. 262/2011 Coll., despite being punished for it by the communist regime.
Ms. Stanislava Petrlíková together with her husband worked on the largest farm in the municipalityalone, without the help of other hired workers and her husband was repeatedly penalized for not meeting the supply obligation that was imposed on him. Penalties for not meeting the supply quota stopped in 1974, when based on Government Resolution No. 50/1955 Coll., on Certain Measures for Ensuring Agrarian Production, his whole farm was confiscated and given to the State Farm in Hlinsko. Mr. Jaroslav Petrlík was convicted several times and sentenced among others to custodial sentences. As a demonstration of resistance and opposition Ms. Stanislava Petrlíková during the time her husband served a sentence in 1958 refused to maintain the farm and left their common estate. For this she was put in custody and at the end of 1958 she was released.
The Ethics Commission appreciates the attitudes of Mr. and Ms. Petrlíkovi and found out that by his actions and with the support of his wife in the years from 1948 to 1974 Mr. Jaroslav Petrlík protected his property against collectivization and eventually its actual confiscation, when he repeatedly, resp. continuously stood out against (held a public opinion) against the forced collectivization of the country. This attitude was obviously continuous and long-term and in terms of its length and related sacrifices unique. Ms. Stanislava Petrlíková as his wife participated in his activities not only as a “passive spectator" and someone who has to endure the results of the other one's actions, but she actively supported her husband and publicly stood out against the communist repression embodied by the convicting and sentencing of her husband in 1958. The Ethics Commission particularly appreciates the act of Stanislava Petrlíková when she in conflict with the practical values of the farmer class and traditional priorities in agriculture demonstrated her disapproval with her husband's persecution by refusing to work on the family farm, even though they both were so strongly attached to it despite repeated punishment by the communist regime.
The Ethics Commission is convinced that the actions of Ms. Stanislava Petrlíková can be designated as public political and social attitudes held actively of her own free will, which opposed the onset and sustenance of the communist totalitarian regime and further states that her attitudes were of a public nature and in their substance were direct, obvious and provable acts of opposition to communism. The Ethics Commission is of the opinion that Ms. Stanislava Petrlíková fulfilled the characteristics of the form of anti-communist resistance and opposition according to § 3, par. 4 of the Act No. 262/2011 Coll.
The Ethics Commission awarded the Member Certificate of the Anti-Communist Resistance and Opposition to Josef Mikoláš, born 30th August 1929, as in 1948 he together with his father and others as a member of a resistance group helped others to illegally cross the national borders of Czechoslovakia, by which he fulfilled the characteristics of the form of anti-communist resistance and opposition according to § 3, par. 3 of the Act No. 262/2011 Coll.
Mr. Josef Mikoláš was born 30th August 1929 in Hluboká in the Domažlice district. His father owned a general store, where Josef Mikoláš later worked.
Although the wholly accurate version of the events surrounding Josef Mikoláš could not be ascertained today, during the proceedings it had been proven that Josef Mikoláš in November 1948 together with his father and others provided help in illegal crossing of the border to a person who is designated as journalist “Markus from Slovakia" in the criminal file. This shows that Josef Mikoláš actively participated in a group, whose members fought against the communist regime by enabling illegal border crossing (or crossings) in times of oppression to (among others) such persons, whom they could reasonably suspect of participating in the anti-communist resistance abroad.
The indirect evidence in the files suggests that Josef Mikoláš helped the people smuggler group around his father repeatedly; however 50 years after the events the only clearly provable case is the unsuccessful attempt to smuggle the person called “Markus from Slovakia" across the border.
The Ethics Commission is of the opinion that Josef Mikoláš's actions can be designated as active participation in a group, whose members fought against the communist according to § 3, par. 3 of the Act No. 262/2011 Coll.

References: § 3
 § 2
 § 2
 § 3
 §2
 § 3
 §129
 § 3
 §3
 §3
 §3
 § 80
 § 3
 § 135
 § 85
 § 135
 § 85
 §3
 § 2
 § 3
 §3
 § 2
 § 3
 §3
 § 1
 § 1
 § 47
 §3
 § 2
 § 3
 § 3
 § 3
 § 3
 § 3
 § 3