The Show Trial of JUDr. Milada Horáková:
The Catalyst for Social Revolution in Communist Czechoslovakia, 1950
Adam D. E. Watkins
Central Connecticut State University

New Britain, Connecticut

Copyright © 2010. All rights reserved.
     
 
   
 
                                 
                          
                       
                          
                         
                       
                        
                            
                           
                               
                               
                           
                       
                           
 
                           
                         
                           
                                 
                     
Abstract
Over the last twenty years and since the fall of the Iron Curtain, stories that were once
silenced under the Czechoslovak Communist occupation are at last being voiced. The discovery
of accounts of those who were persecuted under communism has hitherto remained
unexamined and often overlooked by Western scholars. As information unravels out of the
classified vaults, archives, and journals of the not‐so‐distant past, the global community is
increasingly learning chronicles of survival, perseverance, and plights for human rights under
the Red Star. This historiography documents one woman’s unfaltering courage and journey
with the ushering in of Czechoslovak Communism in 1948. The study deconstructs the show
trial’s influence on inducing a country to foster the Communist movement against decades of
democratic traditions. The research reveals the impact of the show trial of Dr. Milada
Horáková in 1950 and how it was instrumental in reforming a society, marked the beginning of
Stalinism, and ushered forth a perverted system of justice leading to a cultural transformation
after the Communist putsch. Furthermore, the revolution truncated intellectual thought and
signified the end of many social movements – including the women’s rights movement in
Czechoslovakia.
With the advent of the Communist government in 1948, a crucial turning point occurred
within the Communist movement in the minds of a nation which revolutionized Czechoslovak
public opinion, silenced critics, and secured allegiance to the newly created Communist state.
The research illustrates how this decisive event served as a catalyst for Stalinism to succeed in a
democratically‐rooted society. Josef Stalin and Czechoslovak Communist leaders could purge
2 | P a g e
     
 
                         
                                
                         
                         
                          
                             
                           
                                 
                                 
                           
                                 
                           
                               
                          
 
 
 
politicians, control the media, and structure economic collectivism but they required a vehicle
to transfigure the mentality of Czech citizens. This was compulsory to assure the future of the
furthest Communist satellite state. The research argues that the process and propaganda
surrounding Dr. Milada Horáková and twelve other cultural symbols was an imperative turning
point in communism’s success thus signifying the start of Stalinism’s apex in Czechoslovakia.
Furthermore, it contends that without the show trial and execution of Dr. Milada Horáková, the
following show trials and political purges of the early 1950s which liquidated approximately 200
people would have not have had the public support if her trial had not established the social
and “legal” precedent. The May‐June show trial of Dr. Milada Horáková in 1950 was a
watershed moment in Soviet “judicial” processes that ultimately enabled other victims to be led
to the gallows. Consequently, her show trial was neither an overt political purge nor a religious
eradication to eliminate the Roman Catholic Church as the other trials demonstrated, yet it
functioned as a trial to culturally revolutionize the minds and beliefs of a nation so fiercely
independent which can only underscore the sophistication of the propaganda at that time.
3 | P a g e
     
 
 
 
 
 
                           
                              
                          
                         
                        
                           
             
     
Acknowledgement
A special thank you F.M. for listening to my bantering for days, weeks, and
months on end with this project. Without your support and humor, I’d still be on
the first page. You made for an excellent travel partner throughout this thesis’
journey across the Atlantic and thank you for your endurance with our endless
conversations over café tables throughout Europe. I feel comforted in the fact
knowing that whatever I envision for my future, you are there to support and
encourage me to go for it.
S láskou, děkuji!
4 | P a g e
     
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
    
      
             
 
              
               
 
 
           
Dedicated to
MUDr. Naděžda Kavalírová

And the Confederation of Czech Political Prisoners

With warm gratitude for believing in me
and granting me the blessing to go forth.
May the courage to remember endure.
5 | P a g e
     
 
 
                           
                             
                                     
                       
                              
                               
                                    
                         
                          
                             
                             
                                    
                           
                            
                             
                     
                            
                           
                               
         
Introduction
The intention of this historiography on Dr. Milada Horáková is, above all, to document
an unknown history that is rarely discussed outside the Czech Republic or in the English
language. It is a subject matter that has not been researched or compiled in North America. A
mother, wife, lawyer, politician, Holocaust survivor, women’s right advocate, and human rights
campaigner, Horáková was a pioneer in the face of acute political and social adversity. The
research’s goal is to intimately study her narrative of survival and acts of selflessness for her
fellow countrymen and what we, as global citizens, can apply to our own lives. This project is to
structure a foundation for future research aimed at preserving political prisoners’ stories and
legacies that have been marginalized from history. Secondly, this study examines the impact
that the show trial generated within the Czechoslovak society and the goal it ultimately fulfilled
for a country not entirely persuaded by Czech Communism. It pinpoints the moment where
vital social transition arose. It analyzes the role of fear as a weapon and how the emotion was
utilized as a systematic means to exploit the Czechoslovak citizens during the height of
Stalinism. Researching the show trial unveils the turning point in Czech mentality to succumb
to the totalitarian regime and the Sovietization of their society. Examining the show trial’s
authority within the historical framework of socio‐political transformation furthers a reader’s
understanding of the elements that paralyzed a country in Soviet occupation for four decades.
However, to comprehend why Dr. Horáková was selected as the symbol during the upheaval
and as one to personify the consequences of social dissidence, one must first research her life
within the historical context.
6 | P a g e
     
 
 
                       
                       
                         
                         
                               
                               
                                 
                                
                             
                             
                         
                              
                               
                           
                     
                               
                             
                 
                       
                   
Methodology
The historiography considers a succession of events progressing to a singular moment
that revolutionized mid‐century Czechoslovakia. Methods utilized is this research study provide
theoretical explanations on why the show trial occurred, the socio‐political factors during that
time frame, and varying descriptions surrounding the event’s importance. It examines the
relationship between an individual to her society, to others, to a culture, a political system, and
to a country in tumultuous transformation. It seeks to weave these events and sentiments to
provide an explanation of the past, how it was the impetus for the apex of Stalinism in
Czechoslovakia in 1950, and the relevance to today. As Czechs and global citizens alike learn of
the events that occurred behind the Iron Curtain, many of these narratives like the one
examined in this study are vital in comprehending the past to ultimately progress in the post‐
Communist region. As more documents have become unearthed and accessible to the
academic and interested community, they enabled this study to be researched at this time. Dr.
Milada Horáková is virtually unknown in the West and has not been examined in the English
language since 1995. Over the past fifteen years, a significant amount of declassified
documents, letters, newsreels, and personal accounts have been released underscoring the
need for this research to occur. Furthermore, judicial application to those tied to the show
trial in 1950 have been transpiring in Prague since 2007 thus illuminating facts and arguments
not currently considered nor documented until this time.
The sources utilized to craft the research study have been court documents,
transcriptions, letters, radio broadcasts, newsreels, film, public records, journals, government
7 | P a g e
     
 
                      
                           
                               
                       
                      
                       
                               
                             
                           
                           
                         
                           
                             
                             
                                  
                             
                           
               
                           
                         
                           
reports, political quarterlies and columns, newspaper editorials, photos, and interviews. The
primary sources firstly focused on the media and literature generated in the years 1948‐1950
which led up to the height and origin of the climax of Stalinism. They encompassed mid‐
Century Czechoslovak annuals, publications, and reports filed both outside and inside the
country. The secondary materials were anthologies, historical accounts, and relative records
surrounding the time period which aided in reconstructing the socio‐political environment in
relationship to an event that was examined in the research. Lastly, the research was
conducted in the English, Czech, and French languages that pertained to the research at hand.
It was essential to use external criticism to judge the authenticity of documents and
historical sources whilst compiling this research study. The author was in contact with
academics and scholars domestically and abroad to cross‐check data and statistics mined during
the thesis process. Internal criticism that drew upon the author’s experience was also
fundamental in compiling the study to assess the internal meaning of the documents and judge
their legitimacy. With a critical eye, the author pulled upon varying materials that were
applicable and accurate. It judged the motives for all components cited. For the study on the
show trial of Dr. Milada Horáková, the content analysis phase was demanding but crucial in
producing a cohesive study that future researchers and academics could benefit from as more
information becomes available in the coming years.
In addition, the author travelled to Prague, Czech Republic to conduct an oral history
interview with the director of the Confederation of Czech Political Prisoners, MUDr. Naděžda
Kavalírová, in August 2009. This interview proved invaluable as gaps in printed research
8 | P a g e
     
 
                           
                            
                         
                        
                             
                             
                             
                               
                       
                                 
                           
                     
                       
   
                           
                          
                         
                             
                                
                           
                               
                               
available existed and without consultation to the Confederation in Prague, the study could have
not incorporated many essential answers required for this project. While in the Czech Republic,
the author also interviewed Mr. Zdeněk Mareš in České Budějovice who provided insight into
the Czechoslovak Communist impact on regional towns. This information was imperative in
learning of the regional effects of Communism at the pinnacle of Stalinism. Two additional
visits were made in November 2009 to The Netherlands and Belgium to consult with academics
and scholars surrounding outstanding queries related to this thesis project. The trips in
November were supportive in nature and were vital for consultation on the show trial of Dr.
Milada Horáková, historical events, and modern questions. Although written documents were
heavily relied upon, the study is put forth also with the inclusion of oral histories which bolster
comprehension of the subject. The interview conducted at the Confederation of Political
Prisoners afforded the author privileged access to unprinted literature, publications, and
consultation with those whom endured the same circumstances as those surrounding Dr.
Horáková.
Finally, the success of this thesis was constructed by braiding many elements from the
historical, political, judicial, and sociological vehicles available at the time of conception. The
archival research coupled with context analysis surrounding Horáková was vital in compiling a
study ‐ one that is essential in documenting for those interested in the subject material and
relating the narrative to the West. Researching this topic, the author found that many of the
pieces surrounding the trial of Dr. Horáková were freckled throughout the Czech Republic and
parts of Europe yet were never produced nor articulated in one cohesive project. Either in
Czech, English, or French, the available materials did not draw upon each other or connect the
9 | P a g e
     
 
                              
                           
                               
                                
                                   
                             
                              
                           
                                 
                           
                      
narrative of Dr. Horáková in one study. Furthermore, they did not take into consideration the
succession of events, internal and external factors leading to the trial, and the complex
interplay of social forces to produce one coherent study to serve as a foundation for future
research. It was the goal of this project to command methodology to not only produce a fact‐
based study of the trial and the evolution of major events in Dr. Horáková’s life, but to process
those facts and how they were interrelated to produce the ultimate outcome faced by the
accused. The project is documented for others who seek to research her chronicle or others
similar to Dr. Horáková’s in their own unique perspective and approach such important and
timely matters surrounding the persecuted. The study is one that can be related to all those
whom have suffered and are currently suffering under oppression and is instrumental in the
global vision for humanity around our global community in modern times.
10 | P a g e
     
 
 
 
 
                       
                  
                    
                 
               
                 
                            
                                
                                   
                                     
                                      
                           
                                                
                           
                       
                
           
             
            
 
 
Contents

Abstract …………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 2

Acknowledgement …………………………………………………………………………………………………. 4

Dedication ….………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 5

Introduction ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 6

Methodology ...…………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 7

Illustrations ...…………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 12

Chapter 1: The Passage towards Sovietization ………………………………………………………. 15

Chapter 2: The Birth of the Czechoslovak Show Trials ……..………………………………………. 26

Chapter 3: The Early Life of Milada Horáková and Emergence into the New Democracy .. 38

Chapter 4: The Rise of Hitler and the Nazi Occupation in Czechoslovakia …………………. 48

Chapter 5: A Sinking Democracy: Milada Horáková and the Communist Coup ………. 55

Chapter 6: Prelude to the Show Trial ………………………………………………………………………… 71

Chapter 7: The Show Trial of Milada Horáková et al, 31 May – 8 June. 1950 …………. 87

Chapter 8: Indoctrination of the New Society …………………………………………………………. 100

Chapter 9: Singing the Silenced Song ……………………………………………………………………….. 111

End Notes …...………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 114

Bibliography ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 116

Oral Histories …………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 127

Author Biography ……………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 128

11 | P a g e
     
 
 
 
                          
                                             
                                      
                                   
                                  
                          
                            
                                     
                            
                                            
                                    
                              
                      
                            
                              
                      
                    
                    
                    
                               
                            
                        
 
Illustrations

Figure 1:	 Milada Horáková, Bohuslav Horák, and daughter Jana Horáková
Figure 2:	 Certificate given to Milada Horáková for the medal of the Czechoslovak Order of
Merit, First Class, May 13, 1946.
Figure 3:	 Certificate given to Milada Horáková for the medal of the Czechoslovak Military
Cross, March 8, 1946.
Figure 4:	 Vlasta Cover, Vlasta, Volume 1, Issue 25, 1947.
Figure 5:	 “Do we actually govern together?” By Dr. Milada Horáková,
Vlasta, Volume 1, Issue 2, 1947.
Figure 6:	 “Why Does the Czechoslovak Council Work for Our Women?”
By Dr. Milada Horáková, Vlasta, Volume 1, Issue 2, 1947.
Figure 7:	 Report compiled by the StB of Milada Horáková’s illegal activity, March 14, 1947.
Figure 8:	 Interrogation record of Dr. Horáková, March 14, 1950, p. 2.
Figure 9:	 Prison photograph of Milada Horáková, 1949.
Figure 10:	 Page 1 from Horáková’s personal statement of defense from Ruzyně,
November 9, 1949.
Figure 11:	 Letter from Čeněk Král dated December 12, 1949.
Figure 12:	 Dr. Horáková facing the prosecution, 1950.
Figure 13:	 Dr. Horáková facing her judges, 1950.
Figure 14:	 Dr. Horáková facing her accusers, 1950.
Figure 15:	 The arraignment of Milada Horáková and the conclusion, 1950, p. 18.
Figure 16:	 The arraignment of Milada Horáková and her twelve co‐defendants, 1950.
Figure 17:	 The official document stating Dr. Horáková’s death sentence.
12 | P a g e
     
 
 
    
                      
                           
Note:
ABS, or Archiv bezpečnostních složek, refers to the “Security Services Archive,”

based in Prague. Illustrations throughout this study are accessed from the ABS collection.

13 | P a g e
     
 
 
 
 
                           
 
   
                 
                             
           
                     
     
                     
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
           
                                     
Don’t be frightened and sad because I am not coming back any more.

Learn,

my child,

To look at life early as a serious matter.

Life is hard, it does not pamper anybody, and for every time it strokes you,
it gives you ten blows.
Become accustomed to that soon, but don’t let it defeat you.
Decide to fight.
Have courage and clear goals and you will win over life.
Letter
Milada Horáková to daughter Jana Horáková.
Pankrác Prison, June 1950.
14 | P a g e
     
 
 
       
 
                           
                               
                             
                                 
                             
                           
                               
                              
                                 
                          
                           
                            
                             
                                  
                             
                           
                         
                                
1 

The Passage toward Sovietization
Following the days of the horrific Second World War, most of Central and Eastern
Europe were in the clutches of Stalin. General popular opinion in these states viewed the
Soviet Union as the liberators from Nazi Fascism however nothing could be more further from
the truth. Politically motivated, the “liberation” in 1945 was a ruse agreed to by American and
British powers to allow the Soviets to emancipate these cities across Europe. To illuminate, and
as it pertains to then Czechoslovakia, the American forces were allowed under Truman to
liberate Plzeň  but could not infiltrate more east into the country to carve the Nazis out of
Prague. After the Yalta Agreement, the Americans, British, and Soviet powers agreed to craft a
line from the Baltic Sea pulling down to the Adriatic Sea as to “who” would eventually get
“what.” Stalin had known he could manipulate the socio‐political consequences of the Munich
Agreement in 1938, signed by the Americans, British, and French, that annexed parts of
Czechoslovakia to Hitler without a struggle. The Allied agreement that turned the country over
to Fascism would resonate with the Czechs in 1945 whilst resurrecting the country in the post‐
War years. The Czechs believed that they no longer could rely on the promises made by the
West therefore allowing the political and public dismay to shift toward Soviet support and the
rise of the Communist Party. Czechoslovakia in the post‐ War years was dependent upon
international support in restoring their pre‐ War democracy as many leaders such as President
Beneš were returning from exile in London. It can be argued that this openness or dependence
15 | P a g e
     
 
                                 
                     
                            
                                   
                               
                                  
                               
                         
                              
                               
                      
                         
                       
                          
                            
                           
                                
                           
                           
                     
                            
                             
on outside state actors to aid the Czechs politically was exploited and served as one of the
reasons why support for the Communist Party (Komunistická strana  Československa or KSČ)
spiked in 1946. As Kubat explains, “The Communists – who during the First Republic (1918‐
1938) had averaged about 10 per cent of all votes – scored a “landslide” victory in the May
elections of 1946” (Kubat 696). However, Mr. Kubat’s assertion that the election was a
“landslide” is not wholly correct. In fact, the Communists lost the election in Slovakia in 1946 to
the Democratic Party and in the Czech lands, the Communists won only a third of Parliamentary
seats but with stiff competition from three other anti‐Communist parties which vied for
democratic seats (Československá volební statistika). In the case of the latter and as we shall
see with Dr. Milada Horáková, the main threat to the Czech Communist Party was the Czech
National Socialist Party (Česká strana národně  sociální or  ČSNS) lead by President Beneš.
Collectively, however, the small country of Czechoslovakia after the War years slightly turned
their embattled country towards Moscow to seek rebuilding and military support that
ultimately played into Stalin’s wishes. The overall “assistance” in Czechoslovakia from the Red
Army and Soviets was one dimension of obtaining support for the Communist Party. Another
example was the Communists orchestrating “People’s Courts” to try those guilty of War crimes
against the Czech people in Prague. The latter stayed their presence for an additional two years
after the War and underlined the perception that the Soviets were aiding via cooperation,
justice, and camaraderie. In essence, support for the Communist Party existed but Czech
society required much more grooming to convince the democratically‐rooted country into
supporting Communism immediately after the War. With the absence of the West in Central
European matters in the years after the War, the socio‐political ground was becoming fertile for
16 | P a g e
     
 
                                
                   
                         
                         
                       
                         
                           
                                 
                          
                               
                           
                           
                         
                   
                    
                         
                                 
                             
                       
                             
                       
                            
a Communist coup d’état that would come to fruition by February 1948. The free election of
1946 would be the Czech’s last for over four decades.
With the bitter arguing in Parliament with the newly appointed Communist seats, KSČ’s
Prime Minister Klement Gottwald and his party were actively working in conjunction with
USSR’s leaders to devise elaborate strategies and propaganda to overthrow the multi‐party
government. The tactics devised between Moscow and Prague were carefully calculated and
executed with much help from the Soviets who had familiarity in propaganda and campaigns
from the early 1920s. In Czechoslovakia, a popular method to prop the new order was to
overthrow public figures on charges of treason or espionage. These declarations before the
public under the ruse of collaboration with foreign enemies such as the Nazis during the War
were effective in establishing the new order. Furthermore, the Soviets and Communist Czechs
focused efforts on an intensified Czech class struggle which relied heavily on students, farmers,
peasantry, and lower‐middle class citizens’ support. As the tension grew, the democratic
parties of Czechoslovakia underestimated this sophistication and organization of the
Communist Party thereby lacking countermeasures to circumvent the Communist’s argument.
For example, one author notes, “Instead of combing their efforts, the democratic parties
competed among themselves just as they hoped to compete with the Communist Party . . . the
democrats’ disunity of aims and methods were in sharp contrast to the strict discipline and
carefully planned strategy on the Communist side” (Duchacek 513). The KSČ  momentum
leading up to the February coup was gaining strength as the Czech Communists relied on
campaigning for worker’s rights while unleashing propaganda against the democratic parties on
baseless claims of anti‐Czech involvement with foreign leaders. This tactic would draw on the
17 | P a g e
     
 
                              
                           
   
 
                     
                       
                         
                       
                           
       
                     
                         
                             
                        
                          
                             
                             
                                  
                              
                         
                         
                             
                         
                          
public fear produced after the Munich Agreement of 1938 and the treachery it symbolized. The
intensity at which the Communists were campaigning at this junction is articulated by Duchacek
who states
Some were convinced that the rhythm of Communist demands had quickened
because the Communists feared defeat at the polls and therefore desired to
settle the election issues beforehand and at the same time wanted to impress
the voter with the continued success of Communist activities in the government
and parliament, so that he would vote for the winners and not the “permanent
losers,” the democratic parties.
Duchacek 520.
Furthermore, Duchacek also comments that the Communist machinery devised a way to isolate
one Democratic Party from the other or to publically demonize a leader for any anti‐ state
activity (513). This argument underscores the Communist reliance on international factors and
stressors to duly sway the internal socio‐political issues in Czechoslovakia. However, the Czech
people were not fully aware that the Czech Communists were in cooperation with a larger,
more powerful apparatus in Moscow. The Soviet carnage and upheaval, as exemplified in the
horrors of the Great Soviet Purges of the 1930s, was well known in Czechoslovakia. It was also
known in the post‐ War years that a romanticized view of pan‐ Slavic unity existed. The average
citizen, conversely, could have not predicted that the Soviets and Czech Communists like
Gottwald or Secretary‐General of the Party Rudolf Slánský would use Communism as an
instrument of terror, destruction, and a weapon of revolution. To this end, the greatest
disaster of the political partnership was that the Czech Communists implemented the most
violent crimes against their fellow citizens which highlights shared blame with Moscow. The
18 | P a g e
     
 
                             
                                
                             
                             
                         
                          
                               
                             
                             
                       
                          
                                  
                                   
                             
                         
                         
                               
                             
                         
                     
                       
Czech human cost would be significant to those who would oppose Stalin and the Soviet‐Czech
agenda. The working class ruse was a political arm veiled to assume exclusive control of these
lands fueled only by manipulating the fears and vulnerability of Czech citizens in the post‐ War
years. If the populace had known that Stalin and Czech Communists would annihilate the
judicial, industrial, cultural, and agricultural facets arguably the citizens would have not backed
the discourse from Parliament. After all, the Communist movement was campaigned to the
people as a political structure to be guided by the people, the working class, and working
intelligentsia – not the Soviets or the KSČ. Moreover, with many media outlets now
nationalized by the KSČ  in 1947 and led by the Cultural Affairs Minister Gustav Bareš, any
democratic message was significantly weakened, distorted, or blocked. Instead, the Czech
nation was broadcasted daily pro‐Soviet rhetoric. What the Communists offered was “a specific
national path to socialism, a route that would be peaceful, without civil war. It found its origin
in a democratic and national revolution, like that of 1918, but this time led and directed by the
working class” (Skilling 103). By 1948, and after a period of restored democracy in
Czechoslovakia in what is referred to as the Second Republic (1945‐1948), the Kremlin
propaganda apparatus had stripped the public down thereby giving way for pro‐Soviet political
leaders to drive their message to their fellow brothers and sisters to unite against the treachery
and imperialism of the West. Shortly following, and with the threat of Soviet military
intervention, democratic parliamentary leaders in the last week of February 1948 handed in
their resignations to President Beneš which collapsed the government and unified
Czechoslovakia with the Soviet Union. With the Communist coup having succeeded,
19 | P a g e
     
 
                                  
                     
                         
                        
                               
                              
                             
                                  
                       
                         
                           
                           
                         
                           
                            
                         
                           
             
                          
                         
                   
Czechoslovakia was the last state to align with the Kremlin in the Soviet bloc. The nation was
only months away from the free elections scheduled for May 1948.
Countries like Hungary, Poland, and Czechoslovakia soon were swept up in fierce
Russianization. Russian language, customs, traditions, and holidays were taught to the people,
economics and trade seeking to sow the Soviet seeds were imposed, and the gradual effort to
form one Soviet identity had begun. The plan “was designed to create new generations which
would be isolated from Western culture and influence and trained to recognize and applaud the
benefits of Soviet and Communist rule” (Byrnes 8). In a country of over 15 million people from
various cultural, ethnic, religious, and ideological backgrounds, the complexion of the state
would pose a challenge for the newly appointed leaders of Communist Czechoslovakia to
transform. The country had been molded and sculpted by decades of artistic contributions
under the Monarchy but accelerated sans Vienna after 1918. Throughout the early 20th
century, Czechs seized control over their destiny through the arts, movements, and cultural
events which outlined the society. The society fell into many varying social “buckets”
throughout the country with each presenting a cultural contribution to the state. After the
Monarchy, the authors, artists, public figures, and varying cultural leaders were devoted to
prop up their country singlehandedly, propel forward in their destiny, and embrace the future
without serving as a conglomerate state.
During the 1920s and 1930s, Czech culture flourished. Divorced from the Monarchy, the
Czechs celebrated their identity, patriotism, and ingenuity via the arts, academic arena, and
intellectual thought. The revitalization period, sovereign from Austro‐Hungarian Monarchy,
20 | P a g e
     
 
                          
                                 
                             
                             
                           
                             
                         
                             
                         
                            
                     
                              
                               
                        
                            
                             
                            
                                    
                           
         
                                 
                               
                       
afforded Czechs the forum to culturally engage and challenge themselves in their society.
Moreover, contributing to the Czech society also was a display of national pride in spite of the
Monarchy as a way to demonstrate their independence from Vienna. During the First World
War, the arts in Czechoslovakia were repressed and subdued due to the German and Austrian
aggression however, with its conclusion, it gave birth to plurality and inventiveness. Czech
Cubism was born and influenced art and architecture with leaders such as Emil Filla and
Vlastislav Hofman. The Cubist movement evolved into Czech Surrealism which was well
received in Paris and around the continent. In literature, authors such as Jaroslav Hašek
authored The Good Soldier Švejk that contributed to quintessential Czech humor and reflection
on the War’s inhumanity. The Czech Existentialist movement was pioneered by the works of
Ladislav Klíma and the  Čapek brothers who commented on anti‐Fascism through their folk‐
inspired prose. The 1920s and 1930s were of great advancement in the Czech literary world
but would be dismantled with the presence of Nazi suppression that, by 1941, began to deport
these authors to concentration camps for extermination. During this same year, newspapers
and varying publishing outlets were shut down thus silencing these authors and their message.
Their prose fought against Fascism yet sadly, many of these contributors did not survive the
War. Their involvement in the Czech Resistance movement was successful until that year with
very few returning to their country by 1945. Those who did not remain in the country by the
February coup d’état rose the genre of exile literature, stemming from France, the Americas,
and England. By 1950
. . . we find ‘Soviet Reality’ and Soviet practice in every sphere of art and science
appealed to by Czech critics as the touchstone of rectitude . . . The procedure for
obtaining permission to publish books became highly complex in all cases where
21 | P a g e
     
 
                         
                           
                           
                   
                       
                           
                              
                         
                           
                         
                         
                             
                             
                         
                              
                       
                          
                                 
                             
                           
                                    
                                
                                 
ideological points were involved . . . A department of Prague University Library
was made responsible for controlling all books sent or taken out of the country,
and quite apart from political works, even volumes of lyrical verse have been put
on the contraband list after adverse criticism of the Party.
Viney 471‐472
The authors who remained in Czechoslovakia learned of tight censorship and all avant garde
prose was illegal. Anything that was against the Cultural Department of the Prime Minister was
grounds for imprisonment. Coupled with the broadcasted show trials, the artistic and
counterculture was transformed via silence and fear. Those who had embraced these artistic
movements quickly distanced themselves from the art and evolution of social rights and
freedoms provided under the democracy. Those who aligned with the Communists now
engaged in the socialist realist genre that was void of all expressions of dissidence or
subversion. With many of the artists having perished during the War or having fled
Communism, the Czech Resistance movement during the rise of Soviet Communism could not
successfully or strategically organize itself to undermine the rise of the Red Tide. The show
trials inflicted terror on any individual who embraced “Western” ideologies, currants of
thought, or freedoms of expression that was against the Soviet and Communist grain.
Music and the arts during the 1920s and 1930s also contributed to the founding of the
Czechoslovak state and projection of identity. The country had been the home of acclaimed
composers Antonín Dvořák and Bedřich Smetana in the 19th
century and Prague was considered
to be a music capital after Leipzig. The Czechs celebrated with dance and song in the 1920s and
combined the two in what Westerners know as polka. Perhaps the most joyous of polka songs
is the “Beer Barrel Polka,” or “Škoda lásky” (Wasted Love). Although this may appear as a
22 | P a g e
     
 
                           
                              
                         
                          
                          
                             
                           
                             
                          
                                
                              
                            
                              
                         
                                 
                              
                           
                            
                           
                                 
                              
                           
lighthearted reference, the era was one of celebration and proclamation of Czechs having value
on the continent without being in the shadow of the Monarchy. Included in liberated music
and entertainment styles was the contribution of contemporary Jewish music in Prague which
documented many laws and religious beliefs of historical Jewish faith. Judaism was culturally
gaining more public acceptable in the democratic state of Czechoslovakia. In addition, music
also was vital in other religions and expressionism around the country. For example, the
Roman Catholic Church, premier venue of religious hymns and song with centuries of European
composers, was banned under the Communists and the music (in addition to the religion itself)
could not be accessed by parishioners. Instrumental in celebrating identity, music in opera,
theater, religion, and dance was defused. By 1948 and the early 1950s, music was replaced by
Soviet songs and their traditional folk music. The theater and dance halls had been nationalized
which censored all Czech music and disposed of these ballads. Moreover, the emergence of
Soviet songs or artistic renderings partly eliminated the arts in the Czech language. This Soviet
entrance onto the Czech cultural scene displaced the Czech language and performance pieces
thereby muting any artistic adaptations of classics that could have been used as a tool to insert
a double (subversive) meaning into a performance. With the emergence of the show trials of
Czechoslovakia and their broad reach, those who operated in the small corners of cultural
society were paralyzed by fear that they would be apprehended and also imprisoned. Because
Czech theater and opera could not be performed unless reviewed and approved, the music
could not reach the people and the media had control over what records and scores could be
sold in the country. For students who wished to learn these arts, curriculums and professors
were disposed under Communism thereby ensuring that there could not be a reemergence of
23 | P a g e
     
 
                                 
                       
          
                         
                       
                             
                             
                             
                            
                           
                       
                            
                           
                           
                        
                           
                         
                               
                               
                       
                            
                             
artistic or cultural influence. By the early 1950s and during the show trials, many of these
musical masterpieces fell into obscurity and illegality thus removing cultural identity and
revolutionizing a society into conformity.
In 1948, now that the Communists had seized total political control, conformity would
be expected and other varying cultural or socio‐political dissidents would ultimately be
liquidized. To demonstrate, “the Soviet Union found itself encircled and isolated. Stalin
reacted by turning the occupied countries into satellites, using them as a military defense belt
and forcing the Soviet pattern on every aspect of their political, economic, and social lives”
(Hodos 2). This was achieved through the eliminations of professors at Charles University in
Prague and elsewhere, the banning and destruction of books at national and regional libraries,
demotions or disappearances of leaders throughout the state, outlawing of religious practice,
and countless other methods utilized to erase traces of Czech culture. The economic dimension
that Hodos incorporates could not have pertained more to the newly Communist state of
Czechoslovakia. At the end of the 1940s, Czechoslovakia was the most developed and
economically secure satellite that Moscow obtained. The gross domestic product and gross
national product far exceeded the neighboring countries to the east and did not financially
demand heavy rebuilding after the War like Poland, East Germany, and Hungary required
(Hodos 2). In a culture where higher education was prized, many Czechs were skilled in
engineering, military defense, and medicine – all of which was crucial to the success of the
newly expanded USSR. Geographically speaking, Czechoslovakia was also the furthest state
from Moscow and positioned between the “western imperialists” to the north and the south.
Czechoslovakia was essential for it “helped to assure the frontiers of the Soviet Union against
24 | P a g e
     
 
                                 
                                
                     
                                
                             
                                
                         
                                  
                     
attack; it gave the Soviet Union a strong advance base in Central Europe; it divided the great
continent of Europe and placed a gun at the forehead of Western Europe” (Byrnes 11). Indeed,
Czechoslovakia was unequivocally essential in serving as a geographic, economic, and
protective state. Due to the value it was assigned, Stalin and other Soviet leaders knew that
there was a possibility that Communist loyalty could waver as the Soviet message could be
perverted by the proximity to the West. In order to secure its borders and totalitarian strength,
Stalin and Gottwald knew that the Czechoslovak society would require more attention and
pressure unlike other states in the Soviet bloc. To this end, the search to implement a social
mechanism that would be unequivocally influential and revolutionary had begun.
25 | P a g e
     
 
             
 
                             
                           
                           
                     
                               
                                   
                               
                                   
                       
                             
             
                       
                 
                          
                       
                         
                 
                     
                             
                               
                           
2 

The Birth of the Czechoslovak Show Trials
In a state where democracy and its corresponding ideals had flourished since the fall of
the Austro‐Hungarian Empire in 1918, rapid and violent Sovietization would need to occur to
transition the mentality of the society. As Marie Homerová explains, “When civilizations or
systems undergo extensive change, one replacing another wholesale, those responsible for
instituting the new system often feel it necessary to eradicate as many aspects of the old
system as possible. This is done in order to secure the new order” (Homerová 136). The Czech
culture was strong in democratic beliefs and a cultural turning point would need to transpire to
transform the society. An enemy to the state would have to be identified. With the
Communists having seized power and control of broadcasting, their propaganda was delivered
daily through short wave radio. To highlight, a passage that illustrates the terminology heard
in the country in 1948‐1949 explains that
Rhetoric broadcasts on the radio was replete with expressions new to the
Czechoslovak vocabulary; “the fight against class enemies” or “Western
imperialism hostile to the proletariat.” The radio dangled the threat of a Third
World War which it reported was being prepared by “American imperialists and
Zionists.” The nation was startled to learn that “class enemies” were people
whose political views had always been thought of democratic.
Homerová 138.
As the physical walls of the Iron Curtain were being erected and the Communist message
delivered daily, the plan to instill the Soviet agenda was being sharpened. Socially, a vocal
minority of people in Czechoslovakia and other Soviet satellite states were outraged by the
26 | P a g e
     
 
                        
                                 
                       
                         
                             
                         
                         
                              
                            
      
                                   
                             
                
                         
               
                          
                             
                              
                            
                              
                    
                     
                   
                   
                         
                     
second wave of victimization and occupation immediately following the Germans. The country
was not collectively convinced this was the path or destiny for their nation. In Prague, the
underground movement and former politicians who were vital during the Czech resistance
under Nazi oppression rallied to restore democracy and independency to keep the Communists
at bay. Not only specific to Czechoslovakia, countries such as Poland, East Germany, and
Hungary also sought to escape the Soviet tyranny by holding lectures, crafting underground
networks, distributing leaflets, and other forms of anti‐Soviet expression. But how could
Stalinism eradicate the opposing voice to the Party? After what could be described as brief
pontification, Stalin recollected the “legal” concept of the Great Soviet Purges ‐‐ or show trials.
A show trial’s
“. . . aim is to personalize an abstract political enemy, to place it in the dock in
flesh and blood and, with the aid of a perverted system of justice, to transform
abstract political‐ideological differences into easily intelligible common crimes.
It both incites the masses against the evil embodied by the defendants and
frightens them away from supporting any potential opposition.
Hodos xiii
Stalin was determined to sustain influence, presence, and the agenda in these countries in his
final years. Leaders of the people’s democracy sought to quell the uprisings and amass the
political and social dissidents for prosecution on trumped up charges of treason and espionage.
However, who exactly was a threat and a working class enemy? Homerová outlines the three
categories that were targeted to answer this question. For example,
This new legislation facilitated the persecution of three major groups: the
leaders and members of the pre‐war democratic political parties, domestic non‐
communists who had fought against the Nazi occupation, and Czechoslovak
soldiers who had fought on the side of the Western allies of democratic
Czechoslovakia during the war. In addition, much negative attention was
27 | P a g e
     
 
                       
                   
                           
                       
                             
                               
                           
                            
                               
                                 
                      
                             
                                
                            
                                    
                             
                         
                             
                       
                                   
                          
                           
                       
directed against the Catholic Church, which was considered to be the most
dangerous potential opponent for the new atheist regime, and anti‐Semitism
was employed by the regime as a major element in its drive for Stalinization.
Homerová 137.
The Czech leaders and Soviets knew that those who fought and organized the Czech resistance
would have the strength and networks to the West to unhinge the Communist agenda. Those
who strove to protect the state under Nazi oppression were also considered national heroes
and heroines. Furthermore, it was held that these individuals who were associated with the
ideologies of the West or democratic state did not align with the characteristics of a Communist
Party. Furthermore, it posed a risk to the Party if a creation of a second underground
movement was engineered to overthrow the Communists. Religious leaders and parishioners
were also a threat to the state as the anti‐Communist message because they were already
organized with direction coming from the Vatican – or the West. Ascribing to a religion also
diverted attention away from Stalin and onto a greater being. Under the Soviets, individuals
were citizens who answered to the state – not to God. Included in this bracket of enemies of
the state outside of Roman Catholics were Quakers, Jews, and Evangelicals. In short, the
“ideal” citizen after the Communist indoctrination was challenging to discern. A developed
Soviet society and its citizens belonged to the state and could not participate in extra‐state
affairs ranging from religious activities, educational outlets, and cultural groups. These
activities were believed to be ones of Western origin and posed as a threat to revert a society
or counterculture back to their “Western” heritages. Banning such practices and groups was
two‐fold. If an individual engaged in organizations or activities not supported by the
Communist state, individuals were easily identified as dissidents and therefore, punished via
28 | P a g e
     
 
                         
                               
                              
                             
                            
                             
                
                         
                              
                             
                              
                         
                          
                              
                              
                           
                                    
                                 
                           
                               
                              
                           
public example or trial. Conformity was instrumental in identifying an enemy. However,
establishing the enemy and forming the working class citizen to benefit the USSR would be no
easy feat. From this, the requisite for a sophisticated ministry to propel propaganda was crucial
in generating change in the Soviet bloc. The creation of the Czechoslovak Constitution to
institute laws and regulations was vital for the new “working‐class” citizens. The Party would
need assistance to obtain information and to process “illegal” activity in efforts to apply the
policies, procedures, and laws of the new state.
In Czechoslovakia, Gottwald and the Ministry of the Interior collaborated to extend and
refine the secret police (Státní bezpečnost) – or StB. StB agents were given ruthless authority
to spy in a variety of methods and document individuals and sometimes families to discount
any legitimate or illegitimate claims of treachery to the state. StB agents also were employed
to manifest theories or falsify information to charge innocent victims on conspiracy charges
against the republic. StB agents were engaged in forced disappearances, murder, torture, and
unlawful detention. For those who went to public trial, the fabrication of crimes rendered an
individual to forced labor, prison, or execution. Upon release and return to society after the
sentence was served, citizens could recognize those who were detained and questioned as they
appeared deaf in their left ear as most StB agents were right handed. As it pertains to show
trials, the StB agents were in charge of organizing propaganda and show trials to try groups of
people who personified an ideology or were a cultural symbol and physical embodiment of
social justice. Categories were created to form a group or faction – political, social, religious,
and other countless buckets crafted by the StB to correspond with the current cultural climate.
Often times, clusters of people were posited as co‐defendants regardless if they knew one
29 | P a g e
     
 
                                 
                  
 
                                 
                       
                       
                 
                         
                           
 
                       
                       
                             
                             
                         
                         
                         
                       
                            
                               
                                 
                                 
                            
                                      
                               
another or not. Prosecuted groups could range anywhere from two to up to fourteen or more
individuals serving as co‐defendants or propaganda‐termed “co‐conspirators.” As Homerová
continues
A major the [sic] task of the StB, we now know, was to prepare political trials and
other forms of persecution. Their assignment was carried out relentlessly. Over
the years from 1848‐1955, several waves of show trials affected and horrified
Czechoslovak society and the international community. Czechoslovakia had
been the last country incorporated into the Soviet bloc, and therefore the big
post war “purge trials” or “show trials” began later than the other Soviet satellite
countries.
Homerová 137.
Gottwald, Slánský, and others corralled possible threats, “spies”, and sometimes their family
members for secret trials in the beginning and in high profile, radio broadcast show trials
toward the end. In preparation, the state judicial branch had been nationalized, hence all
judges who were aware of the laws and regulations of democratic Czechoslovakia were
immediately dismissed. The working party judges were positioned to ascend the vacancies to
facilitate court proceedings. These “judges” were educated in advanced six month Soviet
courses and classrooms to establish Soviet and Communist proceedings after the previous
judges were disposed. Under this new system of judicial power and propaganda, Jiří Pelikán
states that “this select group arrogates to itself the right to condemn as enemies not only
individuals but entire social groups – often including children . . . The Party decides on the
verdicts – including death sentences – to be handed down by the courts; and this even before
the opening of a trial” (Pelikán 23). In Czechoslovakia, the 1950‐1954 show trials’ sentences
given were the most violent and high profile out of the satellite states. This is due not only to
the cultural dynamics of the Czech society but also the reliance on a violent intensified class
30 | P a g e
     
 
                    
                       
                             
                            
                             
                         
                         
                           
                               
                           
                             
                               
                                     
                           
                            
                              
                             
                        
                         
                                
                                
                                        
struggle which would undoubtedly reflect Czechoslovak leaders’ loyalty toward Stalin.
Furthermore, many Czech leaders, resistance fighters, and democratic icons who did not
manage to flee the country before 1948 were viewed as potential threats to overthrow or
undermine the Communist agenda. With the Soviets having perfected the show trial, this was
the course of action that was decided upon at some undocumented point in history.
For many, the basic formula seemed foolproof and appropriate in applying pressure for
those struggling against the Communist takeover. The layout was strikingly the same
throughout the many show trials of Czechoslovakia when they were at their height between
1950 and 1954. The Communist Party first outlined a list of deviations that the perpetrator
could commit ranging from plotting with Western enemies via post or radio to “retelling”
stories of national heroes of historical times. Secondly, the list is crafted and distributed
through the StB chain often linking and creating groups and a center who represented one or
more crimes that could serve as a symbol to the society. This list is then given to the
Communist run newspapers to be printed for the society to view, demonize, and incriminate
those who have been indicated in atrocities against the people’s democracy. The citizens, in
turn, immediately called for their arrest, demotion, or expulsion. The arrest is then made and
highly publicized to which the individual or individuals are brought in for questioning to StB
headquarters. Under interrogation, they were tortured and detained under cruel conditions to
break their character and intimidate them into providing false confessions or implicating others
in the state. They are detained while StB agents compile the group for public processing and
determine which verdicts will be handed down. After this is established, a script is written by
the panel of judges or agents to be given to the defendants to learn by heart. This is critical to
31 | P a g e
     
 
                           
                            
                                   
                             
                              
                             
                      
                         
                             
                     
                        
                     
                       
                     
                 
                          
           
                     
                             
                           
                              
                         
                                   
                                  
                             
the show trial as the propaganda is broadcasted nationally via short wave radio, newspapers,
and newsreels. During the trial, the defendant must renounce and confess to their “unlawful”
activities and ask the public for their “just” punishment. The closing of the show trial would, at
this junction, have the public in a frenzy calling for the most heinous of sentencing
consequences. Either from fear of being seen as not supporting the Communist regime or out
of personal conviction, the society was aware of the show trial’s sentences when they were
handed down and embraced these verdicts thereby enabling distorted justice’s existence.
For those who did struggle with fundamental differences, StB agents could offer the
public tangible examples of the consequences for those who failed to conform. To illustrate,
The accusations did not involve just ideological deviations; the defendants were
charged with treason and conspiracy on behalf of capitalist enemies. The victims
came from diverse backgrounds: some were old Communists now accused of
having been Gestapo agents; some had fought against Franco, they were now
“cosmopolitan” traitors; many were Jews, they were accused of being Zionist
infiltrators; some were even Moscow‐trains apparatchiki, they were now
supposed to have betrayed the movement. The pattern of the Soviet purge of
1936‐1938 was thus being closely imitated.
Brzezinski 81.
As Gottwald and his colleagues prepared to purge Czechoslovakia in 1949, StB agents began to
list immediate “threats” toward the people’s democracy. Stalin and his satellite leaders strove
to underscore his message of Soviet ownership and the price for political or social dissidence.
For Czechoslovakia, these “dissidents” in the newly expanded USSR, Stalin believed, needed to
be used as a political and social example to the diverse populace who continued to form cells of
opposition. After the terror in Hungary and the success of a few minor show trials in 1947
devised by two Soviet propaganda ministers, the two were summoned to Prague to contrive a
32 | P a g e
     
 
                                       
                             
                          
                         
                        
                       
                             
                               
                               
                           
                         
                                
                            
                       
                            
                           
                            
                   
                          
                         
                                
                             
new set of show trials in 1949. The goal was simple. The aim was to prepare a cultural
revolution through the process of show trials to transform the public’s opinion and create fear
to shepherd the citizens into acceptance. In democratically‐rooted Prague, this was a necessary
mechanism to ultimately inflict vertical collectivism, authority, and order in a systematic means
to terrorize the Czech population into unequivocal conformity. Czechoslovakia would and could
not be spared – retreating from the putsch was not an option.
When it was decided to implement the show trial apparatus, leaders were certain of
two things; purging the society of impurities and the byproduct which was the fear it would
generate to reform the society. Out of all the countries in the newly formed U.S.S.R.,
Czechoslovakia was the most socially progressive and democratic in the Soviet bloc. Many
leading democratic politicians who fled Hitler and Fascism returned from exile and restored
their seats in the Czech Parliament in late 1945 and into 1946. Generals, military leaders, and
Nazi resistance fighters were all hailed as heroes and heroines for defending their country.
Artists, authors, musicians, and academics were instrumental in reflecting and restoring a
culture in society. From cafés and universities to lecture houses and publishing houses, Prague
was not culturally monotone nor could easily or wholly assimilate to any one occupation
regardless of the nationalizing of institutions. From this aspect, many of the former politicians,
intelligentsia, and prominent figures from diverse backgrounds understood the Communist
threat and maintained their contacts abroad with former colleagues or strategic alliances. To
this end, the appointed Czechoslovak Prime Minister Klement Gottwald planned to begin small
scale purges to liquidate these individuals via show trials. The Party firstly had to begin the
search for people who would serve as symbols and individuals that were high profile.
33 | P a g e
     
 
                                 
                             
                         
                         
                             
                           
                         
                                  
                                 
                           
                                  
                           
                             
                         
                                 
                            
                                
                             
                              
                             
                     
Perhaps the first show trial that shocked the country was the trial of World War II
decorated General Heliodor Pika immediately after the February coup d'état. His trial was
braided with other co‐conspirators which further explains how the Communist Party and StB
agents operated and processed individuals according to their societal value. If the
achievements of Pika and others who were heralded as heroes of the Czech nation were
tarnished and treated as acts of conspiracy against the country via Soviet and Communist
propaganda, the transition of recreating and rewriting history for the people would be
invaluable to the coup to dispose of Czech leading figures. The trial of General Pika and the co‐
defendants began in March of 1949 as traitors to the state who, on the contrary, had defended
the Czech nation under Nazi occupation and strategically protected the country for a period
while in exile in London. Notably, General Pika “had been active on both the Western and the
Eastern fronts, commanding the most significant military operations. Once put on trial, he was
denounced as a traitor to Czechoslovakia. He became the first executed victim of the newly
established persecution machine” (Homerová 138). Although General Pika was the first victim
in the Czechoslovak show trials, the historical role he played in ushering in a new system of
justice is immeasurable. For example, the trial denounced the success and loyalty that Pika
generated within the society and the sentiment of pro‐ Czech pride in their leaders. It was an
attempt to rewrite history, plant a seed of treachery living amongst society, and forge baseless
claims that Pika was, above all, conspiring with the “working class enemies against the state.”
In a recent essay on apology and forgiveness, one author and political prisoner survivor reflects
on the show trial of General Pika in 1949 by stating
34 | P a g e
     
 
                             
                             
                                   
                           
                                
                                
                       
                               
 
                         
                           
                              
                            
                             
                        
                           
                             
                            
                               
                            
                                 
                               
                               
                             
                                    
       
It is impossible to forgive if you see how they treated [World War II hero]
General Pika. They hanged him next to the rubbish. How they treated him
before. If he needed to go to the toilet, he could not close the door. They were
so insensitive. Somebody has to give them back their sensitivity. They were
supposed to make contrition to wash this away. If there is a guilt that is not
dealt with, the curse remains. The nation is cursed twice if they do not deal with
those who were killed. Schools, courts, judges, even the constitutional court.
We are the last ones who cry for this because the majority of us have already
died.
Roman, Choi 363.
This passage illuminates the treatment and brutal verdict given to Pika and articulates the
importance in modern day society to confront these atrocities and perversion of justice. It can
be argued that his reputation and importance in Czech history was completely destroyed. His
acts to save the nation were negated to ones of treachery in restating history under
Communism until the restoration of democracy after the Velvet Revolution of 1989.
Furthermore, researching the show trial of Pika marks the point in time where Czechoslovakia
was being viewed on the continent as a totalitarian regime as demonstrated by the methods
they were employing to instill the Communist agenda. In relationship to the February coup
d’état, society did not endorse such methods of justice and did not subscribe to claims being
made by the Communists concerning General Pika. The international outcry was felt deeply in
the West with France holding a day of national mourning on the date when General Pika was
executed but was a display of disagreement as opposed to intervention by the West on behalf
of the Czech people. Lastly, documenting the show trial of General Pika is instrumental in
indicating the genesis of the show trials and the Communist legal system being introduced the
Czech society. The extent of the processes where not yet known and the bulk of terror was still
yet to come.
35 | P a g e
     
 
                       
                           
                           
                             
                                
                         
                               
                             
                             
                             
                 
                       
                     
                                
                             
                              
                               
                           
                                
                               
                                      
                               
Going forward into the height of Stalinism in Czechoslovakia from 1950‐1954, many
internal and external factors would play a role in systematically terrorizing the country and
underlining the importance that show trials played. The West did not militarily involve
themselves with the crimes against humanity being committed in the Soviet bloc due to the
emergence of the Cold War and fear of a Third World War. Many international leaders shied
away from involving themselves or allocating physical resources to involve themselves in Soviet
matters. The only attempts that were made to quell the violent purges were to publically
appeal for a convicted individual’s clemency however that would prove too risky for it may
escalate the penalty or implicate the individual with collaborating with the West. In short,
involvement in the satellite states was almost void from foreign action and the inaction from
Western actors was furthered by the Korean War.
For those behind the Iron Curtain and under the oppression of Communist
totalitarianism, the violent terror and arrests unleashed throughout the country of
Czechoslovakia would prove to last for the next decade. The StB was acquiring more power and
public support as the grip on society intensified and the methods of propaganda became more
sophisticated. Yet for a society who endured Nazism reluctance to accept the fate Czechs were
now enduring at home was far too great to bear. Stalinists recognized this fact and
orchestrated the most successful show trial that could captivate a society and revolutionize a
culture. The plan to finally plunge the Czechs into complacency needed a social catalyst and an
agent for change that would hinge the February coup to the future success of a Communist
state. The person to be led into the show trial would have to be one that the public could
relate to, empathize with, and who personified as many great traits that the Czechs viewed as
36 | P a g e
     
 
                              
                            
                              
                             
                              
                         
                              
                       
                  
                         
                           
                           
                                
                           
               
an enduring patriot. Selecting such a citizen would undoubtedly send a chilling effect over
society. Furthermore, the individual would also have to be personally relatable and one that
the public could identify with to ultimately bring out social change. Stalinists knew that the
cultural transformation to publically stage for consumption could not be in the upper military or
political echelon as the event would not be personalized by the viewer. As aforementioned, the
show trail selection was calculated and determined by internal driving forces which reflected
the social conditions of the time. The Communists planned for a revolutionary event to be
heavily broadcasted as propaganda that would induce a culture into submission which
ultimately established the commencement of climaxing Stalinism in Czechoslovakia.
According to Hungarian show trial survivor, Hodos states, “more than one hundred
perished subsequently and tens of thousands were jailed or deported. More than 136,000
Czechs, communists, and non‐communists, were victims in one way or another of the terror;
these out of a total national population of 14 million” (Hodos 13). In actuality, however, the
show trials in Czechoslovakia tried, condemned, and executed over 200 people. From this
number, only one was female – Milada Horáková.
37 | P a g e
     
 
 
                       
 
                           
                             
                               
                           
                              
                           
                                 
                             
                              
                             
                           
                              
                                
                              
                                  
                                   
     
3 

The Early Life of Milada Horáková and Emergence into the New Democracy
Born on December 25, 1901, Milada (Králová) Horáková entered into a middle class
family in Prague’s Vinohrady district at Náměstí Jiřího z Poděbrad. Second daughter of Mr.
Čeněk Král, manager of a pencil factory and Czech political devotee, and Mrs. Anna Králová, a
devoted mother, Milada spent her early years investigating the world around her with older
sister Marta (b. 1899) and younger brother Jiří (b. 1908). She enjoyed long summer afternoons
in her father’s library inquiring about his papers and listening to his conversations with
colleagues he had in the evenings on the latest developments of the coming Great War. Her
father was an ardent follower of Tomáš Garrigue Masaryk’s Czech People’s Party and its plight
for independence from the Monarchy. As a dominant figure in the family, Milada was shaped
by the ideals of her father and the political environment in her household. Undoubtedly,
Milada’s future career and endeavors drew upon these life experiences that would mold the
woman she would become in Czech society. In 1914, however, both Marta and Jiří developed
scarlet fever within days of each other and passed away. Milada was “deeply affected by what
happened. She came to understand that life can be different from what she had experienced
up to that point, and she learned pity for suffering” (Iggers 288). Soon, her mother gave birth
to a third daughter, Věra, in 1915 much to the happiness of the family who had suffered two
life‐altering losses.
38 | P a g e
     
 
                   
                                  
                            
                           
                              
                              
                                
                           
                              
                               
                                 
                         
                                  
                              
                                 
                                 
                                  
                           
                             
                            
                                 
         
With the crumbling Austro‐Hungarian monarchy around her, Milada participated in
peace rallies at young age and would throw roses over the wall of a soldier’s camp. Activities
such as these were considered unpatriotic and provocative. On May 1, 1918, Horáková partook
in an anti‐War demonstration that led to her expulsion from Upper Secondary school in
Vinohrady where she had been hitherto excelling. Her life would see more hardship before the
Monarchy failed. Her mother, too, would pass away before the War’s end leaving Milada to
raise young Věra to help the now family of three. “Some authors attribute her later willingness
to sacrifice herself for others when imprisoned to the experience of this family tragedy”
(Provakotor 1). Through the personal and scholastic turmoil, it would not be until the War’s
conclusion that she would enroll in another school in Vinohrady and finish her final exams in
1921. As an apt student, she had shined in debate and the humanities yet her personal
conviction and familial support backing those decisions appeared to have caused hardship in
society. She was a free individual who did not act within the constraints of a society’s especially
Victorian beliefs and values emulating from Vienna. It would not be until the War’s completion
and creation of the Czechoslovak state that Milada would be given a stronger foothold to act on
her ambitions. Through her inspiration to aid those in need in the years after the War’s
conclusion, Milada joined the Red Cross to assist her fellow citizens affected by the War. It was
a new society that was influencing and sculpting the new state’s political structure now
granting the adult Milada the freedoms she never thought she would have had under the
Monarchy. From this experience, she would guard and remember the lesson learned that it
was possible for a society to form a socio‐political climate that, in turn, granted the citizens the
freedoms to shape individual destiny.
39 | P a g e
     
 
                           
                         
                                 
                       
                           
                         
                         
                          
                             
                                  
                              
                          
                                 
                                 
                             
                                 
                                   
                              
                                   
                         
                              
With the Czech democratic state now in place, the country of Czechoslovakia would
offer promise and promote equal rights for women, specifically in education where women
now could move out of mere lectures or audits and into disciplines such as medicine, law, or
philosophy. As Feinberg notes, “Czechoslovak women enjoyed equal political rights, equal
access to education, and (at least when single) relatively free access to employment and
professional opportunities” (Feinberg 205). Horáková had the opportunity and seized it to
enroll in the prestigious Charles University’s law program where women had been banned
under the Habsburg’s reign from participating. Iggers writes though that “Milada wanted to
study medicine, but her father, prejudiced against the medical profession after the death of his
two children, persuaded her that she could also help the suffering if she studied law. She finally
agreed, and hoped to devote herself to social work” (Iggers 289). Once enrolled at Charles
University, her involvement in Czech politics and cultural events flourished. She studied the
writings of Masaryk and learned the anatomy of her new country which was in stark contrast to
the environment in which she was raised and educated as dictated by Vienna. In this new
country, Milada was given options – something that women never could access. A woman
could now assign value to their own individual lives without living as part of an extension of
family or social life. During the last two years of her studies, she met Bohuslav Horák, an
agricultural engineering student, and fell in love. In 1926, she earned her Ph.D. from Charles
University and married in 1927. In the spring of the same year, she secured a position working
in the Department of Social Welfare and Central Social Services Authority which allocated
resources to assist women and children gain access to proper housing and healthcare. With the
40 | P a g e
     
 
                               
                                      
                       
                             
                          
                               
                         
      
                                
                             
                         
                   
                                
                     
                           
                             
                         
                              
                         
                       
                           
                               
                        
chance of coming into her own as a modern woman, Milada searched for outlets to channel
such lofty ambitions. It did not take long for her to find such a just and timely cause.
Dr. Horáková engaged and dedicated herself in the Women’s Rights movement and
served as one of the collaborators on the Women’s National Council (WNC) in Prague (Ženský
Klub Český) – the largest women’s organization promoting gender equality in the country. At
this time she already belonged to the Association of Women Lawyers in Prague that was aimed
at propelling women professionally and serving justice to women without access to legal
counsel. Dr. Horáková
. . . wanted full equality, but also a fully satisfying family life for women. They
should be able to seek employment on the basis of their own decision, not to
help their husbands support the family. Their education should not only be
directed toward professional achievement, but also toward the education of
their own children. If a woman wanted to devote herself totally to her role as a
mother, she was to be provided with legal and social security.
Iggers 291.
With her involvement now in the WNC, she assisted in organizing lecture series, concerts, and
discussion groups on women’s issues. She pioneered gender equality as the country
transitioned from monarchy to Czech democracy. She was also vital from a legal perspective in
educating the members on what rights were guaranteed under the Czechoslovak state.
Furthermore, dedicating time to empower women to embrace their freedom under the
democratic state was also a process Dr. Horáková engaged in with the Women’s National
Council. Democracy and the right for women to believe in their own equality within society
was one element Dr. Horáková was committed in achieving at the WNC.
41 | P a g e
     
 
                       
                               
                               
                              
                             
                               
                              
                           
                               
                        
                            
                               
                                 
                                  
                                
                               
                                 
                               
                                      
                               
                         
                          
The Women’s Movement was not, however, perfected by the democratic wave as
women still did not have rights like right to abortion or economic equality within the family
unit. Of the many ways that women could express themselves within the new society to
challenge such obstacles for women’s social and public health needs was the right to vote.
Women could now go to the ballot box to vote against center‐right parties who romanticized
the Habsburg ideals or traditions of what constituted a family and a woman’s role within that
structure. Dr. Horáková in this sense gave these women and, in many cases men, educational
tools in which to introduce their modern family from Victorian‐era traditions to a democratic
social structure. A family could not progress or evolve without both members in the unit
embracing this change. Her involvement challenged these individuals to think of themselves
within that structure and what it ultimately meant for them personally. Did the displacement
of the monarchy and insertion of a democracy affect their lives? Were women harming or
believe that they were damaging the traditional role of the mother if she were to have access
to employment? Was raising their family in a joint responsibility and, if so, how does the family
cope with opponents to this mentality? For a country of fifteen million people who were just
introduced to a democracy, Dr. Horáková was the one who could carry that burden and was
familiar with the “old” and “new” system of society. Her upbringing with her astute father and
familiarity with social policies and democratic texts gave her vivacity to stand for what was right
and just. However, it would not be an effortless feat and in no way could she manage such a
challenge alone. If Dr. Horáková wished to further the liberties of her fellow citizens and
continue to transform a society through rights‐based advocacy and education, she would need
a strong, straightforward, and passionate partner in the movement. Fortunately for all pining
42 | P a g e
     
 
                           
                   
                     
                           
                    
                     
                                
                          
         
                        
                               
                               
                        
                         
                              
                         
                             
                              
                           
                           
                            
                          
                         
                       
for continued social change in Czechoslovakia, Dr. Horáková met and formed a fond alliance
with Czech feminist Senator Františka Plamínková in the 1920s.
A social liberator, defender of human rights, and straight‐shooting pistol, Plamínková
. . . was a strong personality, whose authority in Czechoslovak public life was
tremendous. The Women’s Council became part of its international equivalent,
with Plamínková as its second vice‐chairperson, and a Czechoslovak delegate to
the League of Nations. For Milada she was a source of new insights and a bridge
to the rest of the world. Later they became close friends; Plamínková treated
her as an equal partner.
Iggers 291.
Partnering with Plamínková, the experience at the WNC gave her a window to be not only
politically active in law and social work but to further her public presence – both domestically
and internationally. On this platform, Dr. Horáková addressed issues surrounding gender which
was ultimately parlayed to the international community when she attended a Women’s Council
conference in The Hague in 1930. With her involvement in the Women’s movement and her
degree, she traveled outside of Czechoslovakia “to gain knowledge about how gender questions
were dealt with in other countries. These activities led to further engagements when new
Czech legislation concerning gender issues was discussed and put forward. She was also able to
promote her ideas through public speaking and participating at conferences in various parts of
the republic” (Svodboda 16). Dr. Horáková was warmly received by the international
community and Western states. Alliances she formed to campaign for women’s rights in a pan‐
European approach were admired. One writer explains when discussing her activities with the
WNC, “The Council’s primary political function was to resolve the contradictions between the
constitutional principle of gender equality, enshrined in the Czechoslovak constitution of 1920,
43 | P a g e
     
 
                       
                                  
                              
                                 
                                  
                                
                         
                            
                           
                              
                              
                                 
                                
                                          
                               
                 
                       
                           
                        
                              
                             
                            
and the laws inherited from the Austro‐Hungarian Empire that discriminated against women”
(Provakator 1). From the passage, we can view Dr. Horáková’s life as having strove to fulfill that
vision. For example, she prepared “legislation to deal with the status of unmarried women and
children born out of wedlock. She also drafted bills to improve the status of women in family
law as well as in blue‐collar professions and in public service jobs” (Doležalová 1). The end of
the 1920s proved to be a major turning point in her personal, political, and vocational pursuits.
Dr. Horáková’s experience dealing with social change and justice for the underserved facilitated
her understanding of how the democratic state was running. Her grassroots efforts with the
Women’s Movement and family services to change legislation brought her in close proximity to
the prevailing politicians of the day. The relationship she was building between her work and
its impact on politics was amounting to something bigger than what she had anticipated. Up
until this point in her adult life, she had suffered no social fallout from promoting the beliefs
and causes she held dear and funneled much energy to champion. A passage was beginning to
reveal itself – one which was logical and found her as much as she sought it out. It would be a
significant defining moment in the changing of the decades that would usher in a new chapter
in her life and lend a branch of opportunity.
Perhaps the most significant junction that would facilitate change in Dr. Horáková’s
future was applying for membership in the Czechoslovak National Socialist Party (CNSP or Česká
strana národně sociální ‐ ČSNS) in 1930. This political affiliation was provoking and timely for
Dr. Horáková for it struggled to establish equality and fairness in the new republic. Established
in 1897, the CNSP’s objectives were on the main social and economic issues of marginalized
groups and lower income workers who were unfairly represented in Parliament. By joining the
44 | P a g e
     
 
                              
                             
                                     
                              
                           
                         
                              
                               
                              
                               
                         
                   
                       
                               
                       
                           
                       
                            
                       
                                 
                                     
                           
CNSP, she could continue to advocate and impact legislation. Deciding to join a political party
was a moment that she believed would not have occurred if the Austro‐Hungarian Empire did
not fall. In a relatively short amount of time she was unifying all aspects of her personal and
professional career into one single thread. Chaired by Edvard Beneš since 1926 who was a
close confidant of President Masaryk, the CNSP supported fostering the freedoms of its citizens,
cooperating with other countries on the continent which was also relatively new after post‐
Monarchy rule, and outlining the sovereignty of the Czech people. For Dr. Horáková, CNSP was
attractive for its political stance aligned with her desire to uphold these ideals in the application
of law and social issues that she worked for relentlessly. Coincidentally, many of the objectives
that she encapsulated were being spearheaded by leaders of the CNSP. By her own conviction
and morals and partnering with many social figures in Czechoslovakia like Plamínková, joining
the party was the most logical and strategic choice.
During this time of political association, Dr. Milada Horáková’s career was rapidly
mobilized as she commanded her practice as a lawyer with precision in the Prague City Council
specializing in public housing, unemployment, and the welfare of unmarried and divorced
mothers and their representation in government. Weaving the membership of the CNSP,
Women’s Council, employment, and social engagement together, one must question how Dr.
Horáková managed to juggle the role of a wife during a socially transitory environment.
Although Czechoslovak society was progressing, some still questioned the empowered role of
the woman and what that meant for the overall identity of the family operating in the greater
framework of a nation and its future. As it pertained to Dr. Horáková, as a newlywed and often
times away from the home, Bohuslav Horák must have personified the newly constructed role
45 | P a g e
     
 
                                
                                     
                             
                          
                           
                                  
               
                           
                               
                        
                               
                               
                               
                               
                                   
                            
                                   
                           
                             
                                      
                   
of the “modern man” as exemplified by his acceptance of his wife’s ambitions. As a woman
who chose wisely in life, she found a life partner who would give her the freedom to follow her
aspirations under an evolving time who was able to understand the passion she had toward
advocacy. Such can be expounded upon because Horák “had full understanding for Milada’s
aspirations and voluntarily stepped into the background, to allow Milada the freedom for her
activities” (Iggers 291). It appears by the late 1920s and into the new decade that the modern
man and modern woman found the ideal match.
As the 1930s continued onward for the couple, Horáková continued to be an advocate
and legal pioneer for equal rights and struggled to provide voice to gender related issues and
reduction of workers’ exploitation. As documented, she successfully married her political and
professional career together to promote her human rights vision that she was drawn to as an
early child growing up under a monarchy. She had translated her own personal experiences as
a woman into the democratic state of Czechoslovakia yet was a realist and knew that effective
change was a living social organism. It was an evolving, collective experience and goal. The
work, she felt, was far from accomplished and she did not expect to solve all of her fellow
citizens’ hardship during her lifetime as indicated in her personal letters. Dr. Milada Horáková
was committed to forging the way for others in the next generation to follow the path she was
pioneering to build on the foundation being erected for the people of Czechoslovakia.
Passionate, apt, and knowledgeable on how critical a period her country was in history, Milada
Horáková wore many hats yet in 1933 she would display a new one – that of a mother. Milada
Horáková gave birth to a baby daughter, Jana, in 1933.
46 | P a g e
     
 
                      
  
Figure 1: Dr. Milada Horáková, Bohuslav Horák, and daughter Jana Horáková
47 | P a g e
     
 
 
                   
 
                             
                         
                        
                       
                             
                         
                           
                              
                         
                           
                             
                       
                                  
                         
                         
                                
                                 
                      
4 

The Rise of Hitler and the Nazi Occupation in Czechoslovakia
As Hitler rose to power in neighboring Germany and with the Munich Agreement signed
annexing Czechoslovakia in 1938, Horáková swiftly used her legal talents and organizations to
initiate humanitarian relief. In conjunction with the Women’s National Council and Františka
Plamínková and Sokol’s chairwoman Marie Provazníková, they secured safe houses for refugees
and their families in border regions now seized by Hitler. Together with her colleagues,
Horáková managed to orchestrate routes from the borders to safely transport victims who
were facing deportation to concentration camps or who were left homeless after their property
was confiscated. She focused on both populations of Czech citizens and ethnic Germans in the
Sudetenland and did not demonstrate prejudice during relief efforts. Horáková formed the
Committee for the Assistance of Refugees which formed a structure around the operation and
established policies and procedures in the mission. Her intuitive nature to prop up this
organization was instrumental in saving the refugees once the Böhmen und Mähren
Protectorate that annexed the rest of the Czech territories in 1939. It is during this time that
she united with the Czech resistance movement and co‐authored the Charter of Czech
Resistance, which delineated the objectives and actions required to save the country from
Fascism. In the Charter, it harked back to Masaryk’s teachings and objective after the first war
to defend the state against oppression or occupier. The aim was to work with the Czech
Resistance members who were comprised of politicians, authors, artists, and humanitarians.
48 | P a g e
     
 
                           
                           
                        
                         
                             
         
                             
                           
                             
                          
                           
                                 
                           
                             
                              
                                
                             
                              
                           
                         
                           
   
This was in response to the escalating violence in Czechoslovakia in hopes to overthrow
figureheads and politicos, such as Nazi leader Heydrich who had begun to deport Jews,
homosexuals, Communists, and other political and social “deviants” in Prague. Through her
actions and engagements with the catastrophic circumstances to save her country and the
people to whom it belonged, the Gestapo eventually found and arrested her and her husband
on August 2, 1940.
In custody by the Czech and German Fascists, she was detained at the notorious prison
at Pankrác on Charles Square (Karlovo náměstí) while they were waiting trial for their
involvement in the Czech resistance. Jana Horáková was sent to live with her paternal
grandparents who resided in Prague’s Vinohrady district until the War’s conclusion. After two
years detention in Prague at Pankrác, they were deported to the concentration camp, Terezín
(Theresienstadt) ‐ just 40 miles northeast of Prague in 1942 to stand trial. She was detained in
solitary confinement in cell number 8 – the same cell where Serbian revolutionist Gavrilo
Princip was held after being imprisoned for the assignation of Franz Ferdinand in Sarajevo in
1914. It was at Terezín “where her husband was also imprisoned. Although they were unable
to meet, they knew about each other and that gave them strength” (Doležalová 1). While in
custody in Terezín, Milada was beaten and tortured during 36 interrogations and spent most of
her time in solitary confinement. Later, Dr. Horáková would “express guilt at having caused her
husband’s arrest through her public activities, but she did not quit the public sphere”
(Provakator 2). While in custody, Horáková was said to have demonstrated extreme
selflessness and determination not to let her character falter. One account detailing her
interrogations claims
49 | P a g e
     
 
                       
                    
                            
                              
                                
                         
                           
       
                       
                           
                              
                                   
                                
                             
                                   
                       
                                    
                                 
                                
                                   
                 
                           
                                  
                               
                                  
She had to undergo hard questioning and merciless torture during which she
simulated faints and seizures. The investigating commissar stuck needles into
her hands to see if she was actually unconscious. She had so much self‐control
that she did not even react to severe pain. Sometimes at night they locked her
into a special small cell similar to a chimney. The fetters cut into her flesh and
deepened open wounds, but the Gestapo found out nothing from her. She
claimed some of the deeds of others for herself to avert suspicion from those
who were still free.
Iggers 293.
This passage is significant for it exemplifies complete selflessness and determination not to let
the Czech Resistance movement waver in their efforts to save the country. In addition, this
experience would be vital in the years to come following the War and with the rise of the
Communist Party. It is true that the underlying currant in the passage highlights the hope she
felt which cannot be paralleled by a sense of naiveté or underestimation of the circumstances
but rather to subscribe to justice always prevailing. It is during this time of great adversity that
Milada Horáková struggled to withstand the storm of Fascism, possessed immense courage,
and did not compromise who she was. It is important to note that Dr. Horáková was said to
have found God during the Second World War at Terezín and brought herself closer to faith to
provide her the strength to endure for a greater purpose. Due to her forthright and resilient
character she withstood two years of torture but it could not prevent the trial by the Gestapo in
1944 which led to her death sentence.
Although faced with an execution order, Milada Horáková refused to let her hope waver
and did not concede to the enemy. She remained incorruptible. She began to draw upon her
legal talents and ability to defend herself to assist the lawyers who represented her during a
trial. She did not believe in the ad‐hoc judicial system that the Nazis were operating and knew
50 | P a g e
     
 
                                     
                                 
                                 
                             
                                     
                             
                                  
                                  
                             
     
                   
                               
                            
                            
                     
            
                   
                   
                        
                       
                       
                             
                        
                         
                     
if she was able to overrule her death sentence, it would be only a matter of time before she
could be rescued. With her faith and contacts abroad, she focused on survival and hope. With
her appeal accepted she was “was held in custody by the German People’s Court in prisons in
Leipzig and Dresden before being sentenced to eight years’ hard labour on 23 October 1944”
(Doležalová 1). For her husband, he “was sentenced by the same court to 5 years. It was in
Aichbach, near Munich that she served her prison sentence, and here she was liberated by
American troops at the end of the war” (Svodboda 2) in 1945. Upon her release, she returned
to Prague on May 25, 1945 to her beloved daughter, sister Věra, and her country. She was
finally united with her husband Bohuslav after her internment and the family joined under a
freed country.
Milada Horáková’s imprisonment, trials, and extreme physical and emotional hardships
she weathered in the 1940s would form the courageous woman she would become in the years
following the War. The experiences would refocus her efforts on preventing such a disaster
from occurring to her fellow countrymen, family, and colleagues. Her political life after her
five‐year hardship in German concentration camps upon her repatriation to liberated
Czechoslovakia flourished. As one historian notes
On returning to the liberated republic of Czechoslovakia, Milada Horáková
reentered public life, becoming a leading politician within the Czechoslovak
National Socialist Party. She was a member of the temporary Czech Parliament,
chairman of the Women’s National Council and co‐founder of the Union of
Political Prisoners and Survivors of Victims of Nazism. In the parliamentary
election of 1946, she defended her seat, thus becoming one of the 55MP’s of the
Czechoslovak National Social Party. The same year she was awarded two medals
by President Beneš, in commemoration of her anti‐Nazi activities during the war.
Svodboda 2.
51 | P a g e
     
 
 
                                
               
 
 
 
 
Figure 2: Certificate given to Milada Horáková for the medal of the Czechoslovak Order of Merit,

First Class. May 13, 1946. (Source: ABS)

52 | P a g e
     
 
 
                             
          
 
 
 
Figure 3: Certificate given to Milada Horáková for the medal of the Czechoslovak Military cross

March 8, 1946. (Source: ABS)

53 | P a g e
     
 
                           
                           
                              
                                    
                            
                               
                                
                       
                             
                            
                           
                               
                
This time, however, was marred by personal tragedy. Fellow colleague and advocate Františka
Plamínková of the Women’s National Council was apprehended and executed by the Nazis in
1942 for her involvement in politics and women’s issues. Her absence left Milada Horáková to
assume her seat in Parliament and head the WNC by 1946. She was welcomed and hailed as a
national heroine of the country and a symbol for Czech freedom. Dr. Horáková’s involvement
with the organization for Survivors and Victims of Nazism was in part in honor of the
assignation Plamínková and her legacy in society after the War. In 1947, she joined as vice
chairperson of the Union of Political Prisoners (Svaz osvobozených politických vězňů) dedicated
to memorializing fellow countrymen like Plamínková who had fallen during the War due to their
defending of democracy, civility, and defense of the rights of humankind. Although an active
member in various organizations and publications from around the country, it would be her
political affiliation that would bring her the most harm in the years following the liberation of
Czechoslovakia and ultimately, the rise of communism.
54 | P a g e
     
 
 
                 
 
                             
                         
                         
                           
                          
                             
                        
                             
                               
                       
                       
                       
                        
                           
                               
                             
                   
5 

A Sinking Democracy: Milada Horáková and the Communist Coup
Within Czech Parliament in 1946, the CNSP often clashed with the ideologues of the
newly elected Communist Party thus leading to Horáková to publically criticize policies and
rhetoric put forth by the Communists. Dr. Horáková was concerned that merging
Czechoslovakia into one unit under the Soviets would alienate the country and dislocate Czech
independent engagement on the continent. As she travelled the country, her political speeches
centered on Czechoslovak foreign polices as well what she saw were the injustices by the
Communists holding “People’s Courts” in the capital. The “People’s Courts” were established
by the Communists to try suspected Nazi sympathizers which she believed was just a political
tool to gain power and was not founded on evidence or jurisprudence yet rather hearsay and
Communist ideology. According to the Provakator, “In December 1946, the Communists
controlled secret police accused Horáková of ‘spreading untruthful reports’ abroad about how
Communist‐dominated People’s Courts immediately after the war had caused many citizens to
be wrongfully convicted” (Provakator 2). Her intuition proved accurate for many individuals
were tried and expelled or sentenced to death even with botched reports and falsified
documents. The version of “justice” being exclusively applied by the Soviets as a means of
propaganda disguised as bringing those to justice for War crimes could not have gone more
against the principles Horáková and the National Socialists represented.
55 | P a g e
     
 
                         
                       
                         
                              
                        
                           
                                
                            
                 
Much of the discourse surrounding the KSČ campaign pivoted on social issues that Dr.
Horáková advanced and applied in the modern Czechoslovak state. Matters surrounding
gender, minority rights, access to education, and Czech identity were all topics being
circumvented and distorted by the communists. For example, many of the tactics used by the
Communists campaigning were sharp, bilateral, and decisive. For women’s issues, Dr. Horáková
believed that the arguments claiming that the traditional role of the family generated the
security of a nation. She continued to campaign for the CNSP and for women’s rights around
the country. In the image below, this magazine Vlasta shows Horáková with President Beneš,
his wife, with other members of the Women’s Council
56 | P a g e
     
 
 
       
           
 
 
Figure 4: Vlasta Cover

Vlasta, Volume 1, Issue 25, 1947

57 | P a g e
     
 
 
                               
                            
                                   
                             
                                     
                                
                         
                     
                            
                                 
                       
                       
                                 
                                  
                         
                             
                                     
                            
                             
                           
During the campaign, she continued to focus on the social rights of the Czech citizens against
the formula argued by the Communists. For example, the conventional role of Czech women
was that within the family the sole responsibility of the woman was taking on the identity of a
mother. It was a backward, gendered argument that was either geared toward a collective
vision on behalf of the state or individual rights – in this latter example, the role of the family
unit or the rights of the woman. To compound matters for the women’s movement led by
Milada Horáková, Zahra notes “in the revolutionary fervor of the postwar “national cleansing,”
however, consensus among feminists quickly dissolved, as polarizing party politics divided
supporters of the Communist Party from the National Socialists such as Horáková” (Zahra 3).
Not only did women’s rights seem to be in peril, but political clout that shaped the social
climate of the culture was being fervently contested around the country.
Questions surrounding protecting Czech identity in the wake of the Nazi Germanization
that recollected the days of the Austrian rule in Czech society would lead one to believe that
the country would vote pro‐Czech – or pro‐democracy. To a certain extent this was true. The
country’s citizens were arguing for a patriotic, pro‐Czech state yet the Communist campaign
was exerting propaganda that called into question the power the Czechs had to protect their
culture in the future. After all, the Red Army “saved” their country and the USSR would be a
paramilitary mother to “protect” the country and culture from the Western threat. During this
juncture, the case for pan‐Slavism was introduced via aligning with the USSR that would unite
“common” values or “traditions.” To this point, pan‐Slavism called for fusing a multi‐state
58 | P a g e
     
 
                           
                             
                         
                             
                           
 
                     
                                   
                             
                               
                      
                             
                            
                             
                              
                               
                          
                         
                       
                           
                             
               
identity. Pan‐Slavism within the framework of Western desertion proved to be a strong,
productive argument for the KSČ. The abandonment the Czechs and eastern states felt after
the Nazi invasion was misconstrued and exploited by the Communists to serve another
purpose. Overall, the Czech attitude of distrust, insecurity, and skepticism of the West after
the War was exceedingly useful as the country continued to hear the political parties’
arguments.
On the political campaign trail, Milada Horáková publically defended returning President
Beneš from his exile in London. He had been receiving criticism by the Czechs for the Munich
Agreement in what some believed was the relinquishing of the country to Hitler to satisfy
political needs. The KSČ  drew on this public perception and distorted it to equate it as
treachery, wishy‐washiness, and anti‐Czech involvement. The Communists also drew upon the
citizens’ outrage, who had to endure Nazi oppression, and painted a bourgeois picture of Beneš
living comfortably in England during those challenging years. This opinion was not a collective
stance as many others believed that the Munich Agreement had saved the country from being
bombed like in neighboring Dresden or Budapest. Living in exile for Beneš also, they believed,
was a way in which to keep Czechoslovakia functioning under the resistance and who was able
to represent the state in closer proximity with Western allies’ strategies. Furthermore, CNSP
and other parties knew that without a political structure operating the country from 1939‐
1945, Czechoslovakia would have witnessed more devastation and casualties if the government
had collapsed. With all arguments taking place around the country in cities like  České
Budějovice, Košice, and Brno amongst others, the citizens were now preparing for the vote to
establish the new government and parliament in Prague.
59 | P a g e
     
 
                                    
                                 
                               
 
                           
                             
                       
                       
               
                       
                                 
                               
                       
                         
                       
                         
                         
                          
                           
               
The election of 1946 was to be the last free election until the late 20th
century. After
the votes were counted, the Communists had won the majority of seats in the Czech lands but
not without competition from the second largest political body in Parliament: the CNSP. In the
election
. . . over 40% voted for the Communists who considered the 16% Social
Democrats as more or less their votes. With almost 24% of the vote, the
National Socialists were the second strongest party; Milada was elected on the
first ballot. The democratic politicians realized that the struggle for the
democratic character of the Czechoslovak Republic was beginning.
Iggers 295.
In the post‐ War years, communism had gained support in the eastern states due to a lack of
stability of former democracies. With the impact of the Red Army in these states and
propaganda being driven by Stalinists, the state’s democrats “felt and were internationally
isolated, while the Czech Communists received direct and indirect support from the Communist
super‐power close at hand” (Duchacek 345). In Czechoslovakia where democracy had
flourished and citizens were given rights not previously granted at the turn‐of‐the‐century, the
Communist Party strategically devised many routes to infiltrate the society after the political
victory. However, Milada Horáková answered Communist calls to regress women in the Soviet
system by penning an article entitled “Do we actually govern together?” which highlighted the
absence of women in the newly elected government.
60 | P a g e
     
 
 
             
        
           
 
 
Figure 5: “Do we actually govern together?”

By Dr. Milada Horáková

Vlasta, Volume 1, Issue 2, 1947

61 | P a g e
     
 
 
                     
       
           
 
Figure 6: “Why Does the Czechoslovak Council Work for Our Women?”

By Dr. Milada Horáková

Vlasta, Volume 1, Issue 2, 1947

62 | P a g e
     
 
 
                             
                             
                           
                              
                                 
                             
                                
                         
                            
                           
                                 
     
                           
                                     
                              
                           
                           
                                   
                                
                             
Continuing, the Communists did not cease on these social arguments made by the CNSP and
Horáková. One of the efforts to gain support was to fractionate the society and convince
subgroups of the culture to support the Soviet rhetoric. The Communists anchored with
ideologies such as the War’s disaster was brought on by Western imperialism and classism. The
Soviets also preyed upon the peasantry in the eastern part of the country and promises of a
better life if the country aligned with a superpower that could help the diminutive country
against all Western evils. Leading up to the elections and after the War, the KSČ succeeded in
nationalizing the media that muted any democratic message from being heard around the
country and abolish any plan for political debate. By altering how media was disseminated,
Horáková believed this would undermine an individual’s right to choose their own leaders or
future pushes for social reform should the Party come into power at the next election to be
held in 1948.
Dr. Horáková believed that moving from a Nazi homogenized mass to a Communist one
was not in the best interest of her country as she sought to return to the fundamentals of her
upbringing and after the First World War. Now with the Communists having won the majority
of Czech Parliament, President Beneš was obligated to appoint a Prime Minster. Klement
Gottwald, a longtime leader of the KSČ  and former cabinet maker, was appointed to this
position. In power, his focus would be to drive the Communist message to the people as the
elections of 1946 were not a landslide and the KSČ still faced opposition from the CNSP. In
order to prepare for the election in 1948 and divert any military intervention which surely
63 | P a g e
     
 
                               
                     
                             
                       
                 
                         
                          
                       
                        
                   
 
                     
                            
                                 
                            
                            
                           
                   
                       
                                  
                                 
                                 
                                
                                  
                       
                            
would not gain the public’s support via force, the Communists used what Kubat refers to as
“pressures from above” and “pressures from below.” Pressures from above
. . . means simply the control of key positions in the government, for example,
control of the Ministry of Agriculture, which permitted the institution of land
redistribution and land reform, “proving land commissions,” committees of
“poor peasants,” and similar measure to gain the support of the landless masses
and the small farmers. Another pressure from above was control of the police
and security forces (Ministry of the Interior) and selective enforcement of the
“retribution decrees. Finally, the control of mass media and printing paper by
the Ministry of Information provided the means of preventing anti‐state
propaganda.
Kubat 697.
Pressures from below were identified as being “the control of mass organizations” (Kubat 697).
For Dr. Horáková, both of these pressures were on track to buckle society and the vision her
party and colleagues set out to achieve. Czechoslovakia was a pressure‐cooker and the vessels
citizens sought for safety were slowly being removed from society. The organizations she was
involved in such as the Women’s National Council collapsed, for example, and property was
seized to house officers of the Ministry of Interior.
As 1948 approached, the Communists could not guarantee another win should society
take to the ballot box. The leaders of CNSP and other civic democratic parties remained in the
country in hopes of winning the public’s support back to the pre‐ War days which was, at this
point, a decade ago for Czechs. The nation of Czechoslovakia had not given up nor had
accepted the proposals or destiny offered by the Communists. In an effort to woo the powerful
Dr. Horáková and head of the CNSP, they knew they wanted her to merge with their Party.
However, “Milada Horáková never had any illusions about the Communists, and always
opposed their activities in every way possible. Knowing about her influence in the women’s
64 | P a g e
     
 
                               
                           
                            
                                
                               
                           
             
                             
                            
                          
                              
                         
                           
                     
                             
                             
                               
                               
                         
                       
                          
                                   
movement, [they] tried to gain her for their purposes. Some of her colleagues from the
university and from the Council of Czechoslovak Women who had become sympathetic to the
Communists also tried to pressure her to change her opinion” (Iggers 296). However, efforts
would be in vain as Dr. Horáková was a woman of unwavering conviction. Knowing that the
Communists could not absorb her on their political front and with other factors playing a hand,
the Communists planned to overthrow the government and put forward a coup d’état before
the free elections could take place.
Both parties understood what a failure in the spring 1948 election would mean for the
people or for overall power respectively. Both parties were educated on the political climate
and turmoil. Both had basic fundamental disagreements in how the country should operate
going forward and the dignity the people were owed. CNSP called for early elections knowing
that the KSČ  was preparing something of a Communist coup that they, in hindsight,
underestimated. However, the Communists turned down the offer to engage in early elections.
As Pelikán explains, “the Czechoslovak Communist Party abandoned the opportunity for
winning a real majority of the people for its specialist programme and adopted instead the
Stalinist theory of intensified class struggle, which had as its logical consequence the labeling of
all political adversaries as enemies, spies, and traitors, fit only to be liquidated” (Pelikán 16).
With the coup scheduled to go forward in late winter of 1948, slowly and with disgust,
members of Parliament handed in their resignations to President Beneš. Members of
Parliament knew that the Soviet‐backed Czech Communists would pose violence and ultimately
resigning would perhaps guarantee their and their families’ safety. Milada met with President
Beneš several times for counsel on how she should proceed and lead the party to victory but at
65 | P a g e
     
 
                                    
                                    
                              
                             
                  
                         
                           
                            
                       
                        
                             
                              
                            
                                   
                                  
                              
                               
                         
                          
                  
                               
                             
this point, his health was failing. The last meeting he “reassured her that if the worst came to
worst he could use the army. She made an appointment to see him a short time after Gottwald
had declared publically that the resignations had been accepted by the President. Beneš was in
another room exhausted, and the doctor had ordered that he must not be disturbed” (Iggers
296‐297). President Beneš and his party had lost.
On February 28, 1948, the government collapsed. The Communists and their
sympathizers formed the new government and celebrated in the streets marking the event a
holiday for years to come as “Victorious February.” They rallied for the “people’s democracy”
and immediately started nationalizing all private property. Furthermore, the USSR was
funneling money and military assistance to enable this newfound “freedom” in Czechoslovakia.
The red momentum was growing. Many of the political leaders, authors, artists, and the
intelligentsia lost their position in society. They were faced with the choice either to support
the new Communist Czechoslovakia or to quit. Opponents who were stripped from their jobs
and houses were left with no option but to flee the country and cross the border into West
Germany. These citizens who would not be reduced to subject status did not have a foothold in
society. For example, professors or editors were terminated as well as their activities and no
longer could make a living for themselves. For most, fleeing the country was essential for
survival. Prime Minister Gottwald was delivering speeches against those who had hitherto
shaped the country with intellectual thought and evolving cultural contributions. In a speech
aimed at eliminating “elitism” of these “traitors,” he exclaimed
There will be no question of degrading the intelligentsia . . . Now that we have
thrown capitalism on to the dust‐heap, we must throw away a lot of the morality
66 | P a g e
     
 
                           
                           
                         
                           
                       
                         
 
                         
                                 
                               
                                    
                                  
                           
                                    
                                 
                       
                           
                            
                                  
                           
                
                            
                           
                         
         
                       
of the past too. Take for example the tendency of the intelligentsia towards
exclusiveness, towards forming a separate caste . . . Where can there be any
threat nowadays to their so‐called “inner freedom” or “independence?” . . . I
really cannot see why a culture catering for the delectation of some tens or
hundreds of chosen individuals should be superior to one that heartens and
illumines tens of thoughts and millions of their march towards the ideals of
humanity.
Viney 468.
For Dr. Horáková, she declined to move or to immigrate to any country. When encouraged by
friends who knew of her potential problems she could endure due to her public presence, she
would reply, “My place is at home.” Her home was her country and in that country was her
family, her father, and many citizens who she felt obliged to fight on their behalf. Although her
colleagues who were escaping Czechoslovakia or going into hiding, they continued to urge her
to leave for safety reasons, yet it continued to be of no use. With the suspicion surrounding the
death of friend, confidant, and iconic son of the first President, Jan Masaryk on March 10, 1948
who was found dead below his office window, she publically resigned.
Dr. Horáková believed, from her experience with the Nazis, that the country would rise
up, denounce the Communist political tide, and reject the Communist coup. The following day
after the coup, she reported to the WNC regardless only to learn that she was no longer
. . . admitted into the room of the Council, and her correspondence was
confiscated. The Communist‐controlled press announced that Milada Horáková
had been stripped of all her public functions. In fear even organizations of which
she had never been a member renounced her, as did for example the association
of social workers. However, there were also many people who were not
intimated by the Communist propaganda.
Iggers 297.
67 | P a g e
     
 
                         
                            
                                
 
                       
               
                       
                     
                         
                   
                           
                     
               
                     
                           
                             
                            
 
                                     
                     
                       
                       
                     
                     
                       
                         
                       
                               
                        
Banished from most public organizations, she began working tirelessly with the other CNSP
leaders who went underground in the same fashion during the Czech Resistance. However, the
application of a similar strategy in the case of the Communist putsch posed some obstacles. To
illustrate
After the communists came to power in Czechoslovakia in 1948, some former
representatives of non‐communist parties (Christian Democratic, Social National
and Social Democratic) attempted to resume their activities. They did not
manage, however, to unite as one effective organized opposition force and
instead often linked their hopes with a belief in change of the international
political situation. The communist regime, however, became more repressive.
Whereas in 1948, at least 1,643 people were given sentences in political trials, a
year later more than 11,000 people were convicted of so‐called political
offences, of whom 57 were sentenced to death.
CTK 1.
Although with these hurdles in place and the swiftness of the Communists, she dedicated
herself to plan meetings on the latest events that were transpiring on the streets of
Czechoslovakia and planned escape routes and safe houses for people of her party. Horáková
also
. . . decided to help the families of those who were the first to be arrested and to
maintain links and exchange information with the émigré population just as
naturally as she and her husband maintained contact with London during the
War. She began working with the so‐called “political six” (politická šestka), the
illegal leadership of the National Socialists composed of Josef Nestával, František
Račanský, Josef Čupera, Karel Šobr and František Dlouhý. She also participated in
organasing a meeting in the Prague district of Vinoř with representatives of the
Social Democrats and the People’s Party as part of a covert opposition initiative.
Doležalová 1.
The movement strove to keep all former leaders and ministers of the CNSP together in an
underground network on the happenings between the new government and Stalin. Horáková
68 | P a g e
     
 
                         
                              
                           
                             
                            
                         
                            
                            
                                   
                                
                                
                                
                           
                                 
                                      
                                                   
                               
                             
                             
                       
                               
was determined not to let another occupation  ‐ Habsburg, Nazi, or otherwise  ‐ pilfer her
country and pervert the efforts made decades ago. The youth was critical in gaining support
and indoctrinating them into a new Communist system of thought therefore, all professors and
disciplines such as the arts and humanities were eliminated. The studies of sociology and
cultural anthropology were banned. The theater which always served as Czech vessel for social
commentary under the Monarchy was censored and radio, which had been nationalized since
1945, catered only to pro‐Soviet rhetoric. The cultural spirit was being extinguished which still
posed a threat to the Communists. She feverishly sought to restore authenticity, fortitude, and
national identity over all Soviet threats in the Czech Resistance of 1948 but the tools in which to
reach people were slowly falling out of reach. Dr. Horáková could not access the society who
was living in constant fear of being incriminated against the new regime. Instead, she strove to
locate her contacts from the former CNSP living in exile in England and Norway. She penned
letters on the current climate of the “people’s democracy” in Czechoslovakia to keep them up‐
to‐date. In a letter she authored to former CNSP colleague living outside the country she
wrote, “It is sometimes very hard to live here. My husband has been out of work for a while,
but I am still holding on. I think I still have a job to do here. Pray for me so that I may know in
time [when to leave]” (Iggers 298). Although faced with hardship and in her words, she
continued to hope that the citizens would not accept the Communist agenda and its existence
would be fleeting. However, the StB soon received orders from Gottwald and Stalin to
immediately arrest all those suspected on treacherous activities as conforming and subjugating
the culture but this was not as simple as the Communists believed it would be.
69 | P a g e
     
 
                             
                                
                                
                                 
                                   
For Milada Horáková, who was well known in society and identifiable as an agent of
change, she was an immediate target. Bohuslav Horák was put under house arrest and was
soon informed by a colleague that the StB were in pursuit to arrest Milada Horáková. Bohuslav
Horák fled out of his bathroom window on September 27, 1949 when the StB arrived at the
home and into the streets to alert his wife. Despite his efforts it was too late.
70 | P a g e
     
 
 
         
 
                           
                               
                                        
                                 
                 
                             
                              
                                  
                              
                          
                      
                                
          
                         
                         
                               
                   
6 

Prelude to the Show Trial
Milada Horáková was arrested in her office on September 27, 1949 on charges of
conspiracy and espionage against the state. Although her husband tried to warn her after the
two StB agents arrived at their home, it proved to be too late. In a rare interview given by her
daughter Jana (Horáková) Kanská in 2007 and when asked about her being 15 years old on that
fateful day and how hard it was, she answers
Definitely. Especially when they actually came to our house to arrest her. It was
really hard for me, because while they were there my father left the house. He
wanted to warn her that they were waiting for her. But it was already too late –
she’d been arrested in her office that morning. So I was alone there with the
housekeeper, she was a wonderful person. After awhile my aunt came. The
whole apartment was under heavy surveillance. They started checking all the
drawers, all the bookcases, you know. The next day I was allowed to go and live
with my aunt and uncle.
Cesky Rozhlas 2.
Upon Horáková’s arrest, she was transported to Ruzyně prison which was the chosen location
since the Communist coup in 1948 to hold all those waiting judicial “processing” or to subject
them to interrogation in hopes to break their character.
71 | P a g e
     
 
 
                       
    
 
 
 
Figure 7: Report compiled by the StB of Milada Horáková’s illegal activity
(Source: ABS)
72 | P a g e
     
 
                         
                           
                           
                             
                                    
                         
                          
                               
                               
                          
                             
                             
                              
                           
                                
                       
                              
                               
                                    
                                     
    
This declassified report first states her involvement with the Czech Resistance movement under
the Nazi occupation. As aforementioned, those involved with the movement were seen as
potential social threats to the new Communist government as those involved were perceived as
national heroes or heroines. The first paragraph outlines her role as the bridge between
individuals and the groups she founded. It goes on to state that she was the chief organizer of
the "home” resistance movement. The second paragraph details her involvement with the
Women's movement and implicates others such as Tomy Kleinerová. Furthermore, it does not
demonize her but states that she aided the families of people who were arrested during the
War. The final paragraph details her arrest and that of her husband Bohuslav and their
imprisonment throughout Czechoslovakia and Germany. It notes that she was given the death
sentence and other details surrounding her War death sentence. The mid‐section of the
document lists witnesses who could testify to her acts of bravery under the Nazi oppression
who also were arrested or mysteriously vanished after the Communist coup. On the right hand
side under inspection, their identification numbers have been removed by the StB in this
document. Lastly, the witness statement beneath goes on to note that she tried to help her
fellow prisoners whilst imprisoned and how she exemplified her patriotism during such
hardship. All these activities were perceived as a threat to the regime but also underscores
how incriminating a heroine such as Horáková to the society would be in producing a catalyst
for change. If those who believed she was such a figure that could not be blemished and could
be brainwashed into thinking she was an enemy of the state then the value to do so would be
immeasurable.
73 | P a g e
     
 
                       
    
 
                                
                             
                      
Figure 8: Interrogation record of Dr. Horáková, March 14, 1950, p. 2.
(Source: ABS)
This page is referred to by StB agents as a “questioning protocol.” Here, they document that
she answers in a “manipulating” fashion on questions posed by the state by using “national
security terminology.” They indicate that her answers are “unnatural.”
74 | P a g e
     
 
 
                   
                             
                            
                 
 
                         
                          
                                  
                               
                           
                             
Milada Horáková’s well‐publicized arrest initiated the transformation of public opinion
on those who saved their country which, consequently, would shift support back to the Red
Army and Moscow. Hence, her arrest was pivotal on that September day in 1949.
Figure 9: Prison photograph of Milada Horáková (source: ABS)
Under confinement, the conditions were brutal and methods such as sleep deprivation and
constant questioning were utilized. Women were not treated differently than men. Female
prisoners did not escape the treatment that the StB applied to the “enemies of the state.” For
example, Tomy Kleinerová was beaten by notorious Karel Šváb “in the face until it bled, and
screamed at her that the sentences had already been decided on, regardless whether she
admitted anything or not . . . For whole days, the investigators rehearsed questions and
75 | P a g e
     
 
                          
                                  
                               
                           
   
                     
                            
                          
                           
                               
                     
                           
                            
                                    
                              
                                 
                            
                           
                               
                           
                           
                       
answers with the accrued. After every deviation from the prescribed scenario there followed
further torture” (Iggers 299). Horáková was seen as a symbol of the First Republic and of
democracy. Her arrest was instrumental in the first push of the Communist coup and was
heavily publicized in the media according to the formula the Soviets and Czech Communists
outlined.
Milada Horáková’s arrest stunned and paralyzed the resistance movement and the
common unbelievers of the nation. Dr. Horáková was critical in the transfer of information
between individuals and non‐party members both inside and outside the state. Her criminal
activity was published in more than 18 newspapers organized under the Ministry of Information
based in Prague and led by notorious propagandist Gustav Bareš. The arrest was a
commencement to transform the doubting common citizen and the propaganda apparatus
began to operate. To illustrate, “First, the Communist machinery develops an attack against
the democratic forces. This would usually include a campaign against one of the democratic
groups, devised in such a way as to isolate it from the others. Furthermore, there would be an
attempt to deprive democratic groups of their leaders or of their strength. Attempts on the
lives of democratic leaders . . . would fall into this category” (Duchacek 517). Milada Horáková
was strategically targeted in this first high profile fashion and cog of propaganda. Moreover,
other Holocaust survivors and those who had lived through the Nazi occupation and were
outspoken vocal critics like Horáková were also arrested in what they believed to be a second
wave of an occupying force. “This democratic faith in constitutional methods,” Duchacek
states, “the formal resignation of the government, free elections, and a new government –
were in sharp contrast to the organized, extra‐parliamentary, and anti‐constitutional display of
76 | P a g e
     
 
                               
                           
                              
                           
                           
                         
                           
                          
                               
                                     
                               
                     
                                
                             
                          
                             
                         
                               
                              
                
                                   
                             
Communist strength” (522). Milada Horáková was swept up in this liquidization of non‐
conformers. By withholding her correspondence with those abroad, this was perceived as an
act of espionage and grounds for treachery to be prosecuted under the new penal code.
The newly implemented Soviet judicial system, the trials and otherwise, was a skillfully
mastered machine. On discussing the great purges in Prague in relationship to neighboring
satellite countries such as Poland or Hungary, author Brzezinski notes “The most extensive
violent purge swept the leadership of the Czechoslovak party. The purge gradually gained
momentum between the years 1950 and 1952. Individual leaders were dropped from their
high posts; others then accused them of treason. In turn the accusers were dropped and
accused . . .” (Brzezinski 82). In the case of show proceedings in Prague and with Milada
Horáková, the protocols for the trials were put into place before the trial began. The
Czechoslovak show trials included on scandalous, well‐publicized arrest after the Communists
released to the media what the accused were committed of doing. For Dr. Horáková, it was
published that she was conspiring with the Western enemy and was planning to overthrow the
Communist government. Internationally, the news of her arrest soon began to travel outside
the closed borders of the Czech lands with figures such as Albert Einstein, Eleanor Roosevelt,
and Winston Churchill pleading for her immediate release. However, those detained like
Horáková could not be released by security officials for they shared the view that any such
release would damage the public faith of the Communists. The arrest would grant a turning
point. As one Czechoslovak report from 1968 states
. . . the victim gets into the hands of the Security Service – after which he must,
sooner or later, and with greater or less coercion, confess to his crimes. Security
77 | P a g e
     
 
                           
                       
                         
                              
                             
 
                       
                               
                              
                               
                                
                     
                         
                               
                             
                          
                              
                             
                          
                             
                               
                              
                                 
                 
officials hold the view that an arrested man cannot be released, since that would
shake public confidence in their organization. Some of the victims confess
because they believe they are helping the Party, others because of promises that
they will be spared if they do so; some just cannot stand the physical ordeal.
Those who have the strength to resist are tried in camera and held longest in
prison.
Central Committee of the Czechoslovak Communist Party 26.
The paranoia was wide‐spread in the Ministry of Justice who often bugged the cells, like Milada
Horáková’s, with wires to tape any conversations she would have with family or others. While
she was in custody, they placed secret StB agents posing as inmates in Horáková’s cell hoping
she would begin to talk or confess to criminal activity. With all these instruments in place,
Horáková never broke nor conceded to the perverted system of justice.
Next, “When the ‘confessions’ have been extracted, the scenario of the trial is
composed, a ‘group’ or ‘centre’ is put together, the depositions are suitably adapted, and all –
including the witnesses – learn their parts by role” (Pelikan 26). While the Communists
prepared what exactly they could try Milada Horáková, she was tortured mercilessly. Survivors
of both Nazi and Communist regimes note that treatment of inmates was virtually the same.
“The interrogations of detainees were inhuman,” one survivor would state. Needless to say, all
those accused agreed entirely to confess to the fabricated crimes, except Milada Horáková.
She was offered clemency for a false confession but she refused. František Preucil states,
“After seven months in Ruzyně prison I was willing to put my signature on any document, even
one stating that I murdered my own grandmother.” Preucil also described his account at the
trial with Milada Horáková, “Her eyes! Her look wasn’t any more her look. It wasn’t her
anymore standing in front of me” (Svodoba 23).
78 | P a g e
     
 
                     
     
     
 
       
                                     
                                       
                                
                                
                         
                                  
                             
                                 
                                      
                                        
                             
                              
                   
                                 
                           
                                     
                                   
Figure 10: Page 1 from Horáková’s personal statement of defense from Ruzyně 
November 9, 1949.
(Source: ABS)
[Translated from the Czech]
To clear up my political and private view on today's state of affairs, I admit that after February
1948, and by my own choice, I gave up all my political functions and all my public activities I was
involved in. I placed myself in my previous work at the Constitutional National Committee in the
capital city of Prague, where I worked at "referat" for the education of arts and sciences.
Naturally, my previous sector in political life and political activities impelled interest about
today's political situations in my own country as well as in the world's questions. Besides this, I
was still searched out by my previous colleagues from politics and other people who searched
out my point of view on the standings of today's events and layout of the current political
situation. I must admit that I looked at the reality from a critical perspective as I always look at
the world because it would be detrimental not to look at it as such. This is why I was involved
not from a negative way but with positive energy to create proposals and suggestions after
February's events. I am firmly against so‐called illegal or underground activity since I did not
know that it was illegal and I publically discussed it.
With the former Chairman of ČNS, Dr. Zenekal, whom I have known for many years and whom I
cooperated with (worked together) and even in the days after February before he escaped
abroad I was in contact with him and I often visited him and his wife with the Ministry of
Interior's notice. I thought this for myself because I did not want to impose on him our long
79 | P a g e
     
 
                            
                                
                     
   
personal relationship. At that time, the main object of our conversation was about February's
events rather than the personal aspects of Dr. Zenekal's family. I did not know anything about
his intentions to escape or plans to coordinate such an escape
[Statement truncates]
80 | P a g e
     
 
 
81 | P a g e
     
 
                           
                                        
                          
                             
                                
                                 
                           
                                
                              
                                   
                             
                                 
                               
                            
                               
                             
                               
                   
                             
                                   
                                   
                               
Furthermore, during the preparation for the show trial, “The Trial of Milada Horáková et
al,” Horáková was given a script by the StB to memorize for her time in court. As a lawyer and
with experience in democratic laws, one can assume how horrid this experience proved.
Cornered and muted, she would not be allowed to defend herself, provide any form of
explanation, and be subservient to the Soviet law. It is often claimed that Gottwald and his
advisors crafted this script line by line to set a precedent for the population to provide evidence
for Stalin that the Czechoslovak Communists were dedicated to the motherland and for their
first show trial. Gottwald not only had the trial outlined and finalized, the sentences were also
decided before the trial even began. “The trial script,” Pelikán writes, “is studied and endorsed
by the Party leadership, which also decides (before the trial) on the sentences – even, as in the
Slánský trial, about the appeal procedure and the rejection of any plea for clemency” (Pelikán
27). Shockingly, “the dress rehearsal of the trial, with the interrogators playing the role of the
judges, was tape recorded to be used in the event, however improbable, that at the public
performance, and defendant might retract his confession. The tape was played back, a couple
of days before the trial, to an audience consisting of Gottwald and chosen members of the
party leadership, an act of cynicism unparalleled even in the annals of Stalinist justice” (Hodos
82). During the preparation, Horáková often deviated from the script and would inject a
double meaning in many of the questions she answered.
The StB and Party leaders agreed that having the radio broadcast live would prove far
too risky in the Horáková case. Her trial and what it would symbolize was precious to the
propaganda. “Aware of the tide of dissent, the regime sought to instill fresh fear in the public.
A woman’s execution would be suitably chilling. . .” (Provakotor 2) and, as such, would be
82 | P a g e
     
 
                              
                          
                     
                           
                       
                         
                     
                       
                             
                       
                         
     
                       
                               
                           
                       
                               
                           
                                 
                                 
                             
                                
                                    
                           
                               
instrumental in challenging the mentality of the Czech citizens. As she awaited trial the citizens
of Czechoslovakia awaited feverishly. The trial and the media surrounding her criminal activity
stirred a frenzy amongst the population. It is documented that
“The daily press carried articles full of hatred for the accused even before they
were convicted, and after conviction their ‘evil deeds’ were recalled again and
again. During the big trials the press campaign was stepped up, subjecting
people to even greater pressure, confusing them with false information and
urging redoubled efforts to find the still lurking ‘enemies.’ This propaganda
yielded its fruits in a universal psychosis of mistrust, and in calls for the severest
punishment. Thousands of resolutions on these lines were received by the
courts, the Party and the Government leaders, especially during the trials of Dr.
Horáková and others.
Central Committee of the Czechoslovak Communist Party 60.
Milada Horáková awaited her trial and her moment in court and was not dissuaded by the
severity facing her. Czech historian Karel Kaplan notes upon finding unique reports from
Horáková’s cell, “the reports prove that Horáková suffered immensely, being tormented both
physically and psychologically in custody, but despite that she kept a level head and her firm
conviction. The informers testimony also indicates that Horáková was able to analyze the
situation clearly as she allegedly said her trial would be of a historical importance and that she
would be sentenced to death” (Czech News Agency 1). Her show trial would be the rehearsal
for what was yet to come in mid‐century Czechoslovakia. The nation had never before
experienced this process or type of propaganda. It would be a landmark case and one which
would set a precedent for others to follow. The show trial of Milada Horáková et al would mark
the beginning of the climax of Stalinism in Czechoslovakia as executions, arrests, and violence
ensued. Horáková’s trial would usher in social reform and revolution. She was selected to be
83 | P a g e
     
 
                               
                       
                     
                   
                       
                       
                         
                       
                           
           
                     
                               
                                   
                              
                                   
                              
                         
                                  
                         
                       
     
the “leader” or “ring” of the trial and the others that stood as co‐defendants were modern
cultural and political leaders as well as Nazi Holocaust survivors. For example
The accused comprised people of various political hues: Milada Horáková, Josef
Nestával, Fráňa Zemínová, Antonie Kleinerová, František Přeučil and Jiří Hejda
belonged to the leadership of the National Socialists, Zdeněk Peška and Vojtěch
Dundr were Social Democrats, Bedřich Hostička and Jiří Křížek were with the
People’s Party. Záviš Kalandra was a “Trotskyite,” Oldřich Pecl was a supporter of
the National Socialists, and finally, there was also Jan Buchal, a rank‐and‐file
member of the National Socialists who was accused of being 'the leader of a
terrorist gang in the Ostravsko region.'
Doležalová 1.
The country became paralyzed with fear as civil codes were being rewritten and no one wished
to deviate from the new “norm.” So much was banned or viewed as illegal activity that it
caused citizens to “shut down” or accept society ‘as is’ without questioning this new normalcy.
As the trial date loomed, Horáková focused on what she believed in and what she had stood for
her country, family, colleagues, and faith regardless of what fate would bring. She was not
permitted to see family or colleagues but remained isolated in confinement from September
1949 until the scheduled trial date of May 31, 1950. Mr. Král, her 81‐year‐old father and now
caretaker of daughter Jana, petitioned and pleaded with the government to allow Jana
Horáková permission to have written communication with her mother however, such efforts
would prove fruitless.
84 | P a g e
     
 
 
                 
   
 
 
Figure 11: Letter from Čeněk Král dated December 12, 1949
(Source: ABS)
85 | P a g e
     
 
                             
                       
                      
While she waited trial with the other co‐defendants on trumped up indictments of treason and
espionage, she demonstrated great courage, conviction, and unfaltering faith in a greater
purpose that could not be identified nor explained at that time.
86 | P a g e
     
 
 
                            
 
 
                   
 
                               
                           
                        
                           
                                
                                
                                    
                              
                           
                               
                        
                                 
                               
                                      
                                    
                          
7 

The Show Trial of Milada Horáková et al, 31 May – 8 June. 1950
“When timber is felled, chips begin to fly” – Stalin
In the trial of Milada Horáková, the show trial would be the first in Czechoslovakia –
complete with a daily radio broadcast, filmed, and pictures for the newspapers. The
defendants were transferred to the courtroom to uproarious hatred and Communist fanfare.
The courtroom was decorated with swastikas, guns, and all other symbols of treachery and
evils. The trial was completely staged to be the most sophisticated arm of propaganda at the
time. It was led by five judges ‐ Josef Urválek, Juraj Vieska, Jiří Kepák, Antonín Havelka and
Ludmila Brožová ‐ who were seated in a line at a long bench. In the center of the courtroom
was a platform with microphones adhered to the banister. The courtroom was filled with Czech
citizens from around the country from “factories, offices, and even schools where people got
tickets to enter the courtroom, working people were taken there by buses. The trial was
extraordinary also for its public acceptance” (PolticalPrisoners.eu 1). Outside of Prague, the
show trial of Milada Horáková et al was equally on display for mass consumption. As one
citizen notes, “Here in Pardubice they ran the monster processes in the Grand Hotel. That
doesn’t exist anymore but it was the biggest hall in the town for 400 or 500 people. They were
giving us tickets to that. People used to go watch the processes and they were so fanatic that
they would really see criminals in those victims” (PoliticalPrisoners.eu 1). The hysteria being
87 | P a g e
     
 
                       
                               
                             
                             
                                  
                        
                               
                             
                               
                             
                                 
                     
                               
                          
                                    
                         
                            
    
                  
    
                                          
                                        
 
generated in Prague proved equally important transforming the minds to citizens throughout
the country. The show trial of Milada Horáková was important for the Communists for it
reached and directly approached the citizens. The defendants were not held in an upper
echelon that would have a dismissive public but would assert attention from the average citizen
because they could see themselves in their shoes. For example, Kusin notes that “it is at this
lower level that the second motive of political prosecution becomes predominant: intimidation
and suppression of potential spreading of dissent. Every political trial, of a Slánský or the
simple man‐in‐the‐street, has the effect of scaring off others, although not every political trial is
a trial of real or hypothetical challenger to the power‐holders” (Kusin 625). Conducting a trial
behind closed doors, in effect, would not generate the fear required to revolutionize a country
into conformity nor would it be able to possess the power to intimidate. Dr. Horáková’s show
trial was broadcasted to the nation with unwavering authority and mastery.
Milada Horáková was the first to take the stand on May 31, 1950. During the
questioning, she was asked about her involvement in plotting to overthrow the government.
She was addressed by the judges as “Mrs. Accused” and was drilled by the five judges for hours.
In an excerpt from the newsreel on May 31, 1950, the dialogue contained
Court: Mrs. Accused Dr. Horáková, you heard the charge. Have you understood the contents?

MH: Yes.

Court: So you know what is laid to charge?

MH: Yes.

Court: Do you feel guilty for the acts that are parts of the charge and are laid to you by charge?

MH: I feel guilty for acts I confessed and that are the facts of the case according to valid laws

nowadays.

88 | P a g e
     
 
                      
                             
                                    
                           
       
              
                               
                                    
     
              
            
 
                 
                                 
                                   
Court: These acts which are considered as high treason and espionage?
MH: Yes. Although I have my own notes for some deductions of Attorney‐General.

Court: Yes, we'll get there later. Mrs. Accused, do not use juristic formulations. Tell us if you

feel guilty because you worked in a subversive and criminal way against the People's

Democratic Socialist Czechoslovak Republic?

MH: Yes, I feel guilty for that.

Court: That's clear speech! Mrs. Accused, you said that according to nowadays laws you feel

guilty. I'm asking you now if the high treason or the espionage charge before the valid law are

not illegal?

MH: There are, but . . .

Court: Thank, you, that's all!

Figure 12: Dr. Horáková facing her judges (Source: ABS)
Although given a strict script to follow, that was not the case with Milada Horáková who often
deviated from what she was supposed to answer – often times, putting much of the truth in the
89 | P a g e
     
 
                                
                               
                               
                     
                          
                           
                               
                                 
                                         
                             
                              
           
                             
                            
                                    
                               
                            
                     
                               
                          
                               
                             
                                 
                         
middle of a scripted answer. This might be attributed to her experience in Nazi courts during
the War and in the jails where she often was interrogated under both regimes. Milada
Horáková did defend herself on the stand to a small degree but posited greater emphasis on
absorbing other acts of “subversion” by her co‐defendants on herself.
By day three, the Communists prepared a new factor. The courtroom’s soldiers entered
with letters supposedly from around the country calling for the most extreme of punishments
for those accused. “Artificially created mass hysteria was very much in evidence. In the court
room there appeared baskets of almost 6,300 resolutions demanding . . . that the heads of the
leaders of the terrorist group should fall . . . as the radio spoke of the accused as of the worst
criminals” (Iggers 300). The state had broadcasted that they were seeking from the population
what the sentences should be and to submit their “recommendations to the state.” In one
letter written by schoolgirls, they penned
When well even we are still young, we follow the reports diffused by the radio
on the thirteen shown for treason of our Republic. We learn that they prepared
a new war. We know at which point the war is cruel and how much it costs in
human lives. We remember the air raids on Pardubice. We do not want a new
war. As we ask you as all the traitors severely and be precisely punished.
Pelikán 39.
This push for mass hysteria from the Soviet court to the people rendered sentences such as
“the just punishment” or “the extreme punishment for the extreme criminals.” “The fanfare
which accompanied this trial (and that of Dr. Horáková and others),” he states, “played its part
in whipping up spy mania, convincing the public that the accused were guilty, and encouraging
the idea that there must be still more plots waiting to be discovered” (Pelikan 87). The
international community continued to follow her trial daily with Albert Einstein and Eleanor
90 | P a g e
     
 
                       
                           
                        
                                  
                             
                           
                            
                                   
                                   
                               
                               
                               
                                 
                                      
                       
                                 
                               
                               
                         
                            
                                
             
Roosevelt continuing their appeals to the Czechoslovak Communists. The BBC monitoring
service managed to pick up the closed Czechoslovak radio signal that kept the global
community up‐to‐date with the latest news. Journalists attempted to cover the proceedings
but could not relay the entire story to the print media. As Dowling explains, “the transcripts of
the case were a valuable source of news, as only two western press correspondents were
invited to attend the trial, and everything they wrote was subject to the Czechoslovak
Communist censorship” (Dowling 231). Despite these calls by leaders and advocates to end the
trial and allow those accused to leave the country, the trial of Horáková’ et al continued to go
ahead for the next few days and continued to be relentless on all those who stood accused.
As the days continued the language used by the prosecution grew fiercer. In one
broadcast, an excerpt goes on to reveal the climate of the courtroom. For example “Here,
facing the working people, on the bench of the accused are those who followed the shameful
road of the bourgeoisie, of the criminals who joined against the people of this republic in order
to thrust a dagger in their back. The traitors of the republic sit here fully unmasked” (Beran 1).
As a Czech patriot, lawyer, politician, human rights advocate, concentration camp survivor,
mother, and wife, the short show trial’s judges would refer to her and the other defendants as
“the traitors of the republic,” “the criminals who joined against the people of the republic in
order to thrust a dagger in their back,” “terrorists,” “the rats plotting from sewers against the
working class,” “professional agents of the American, English, or French imperialists,” and “the
little Hitlers” (Provakator 5). Upping the rhetoric was undeniably engineered to reach a fever
pitch for anyone who dared to doubt the merits of the Community regime. One passage by
pro‐Party member Beran from the courtroom warned
91 | P a g e
     
 
                                  
                                  
                                   
                           
                           
                 
                         
 
                 
                         
                  
                             
                               
                             
                           
                        
                           
                         
We advise the traitors at home and abroad: keep your hands off the republic . . .
I call on the working people to ever be watchful. May they learn from this case .
. . to recognize the enemy, those . . . who prepare the new war, the servants of
the aggressors. The people of our republic are not only building paradise on
earth; they also will defend this paradise against the forces of the old, mean
world which is condemned to destruction.
Beran 1.
Figure 13: Dr. Horáková facing her judges (Source: ABS)
Horáková faced her accusations and accusers and appeared stoic despite the indictments she
was being prosecuted for. One of her statements was
I have declared to the State Police that I remain faithful to my convictions, and
that the reason I remain faithful to them is because I adhere to their ideas, the
opinion and beliefs of those who are figures of authority to me. And among
them are two people who remain the most important figures to me, two people
who made an enormous impression me throughout my life. Those people are
Tomas Garrigue Masaryk and Edvard Benes. And I want to say something to
those who were also inspired by those two men when forming their own
92 | P a g e
     
 
                                
                              
 
                             
                              
         
                           
                              
                         
                         
                              
                              
             
 
 
                   
 
convictions and their ideas. I want to say this: no one in this country should be
made to die for their beliefs. And no one should go to prison for them.
Throughout her short trial Horáková faced the charges with courage and some stated that her
eyes spoke of an unshaken woman. While being examined by the judges, Horáková lifted her
head and stated
We lengthily discussed what is called the “Conviction.” Because it is by my
conviction that my acts were justified. I must say that the Security of the State
and the bodies expressed more patience to convince me, whereas me, I was
much less patient, after February 48, to convince itself that violence and the
injustices which were at the origin of my acts were real or momentary. I would
lie by saying that I changed, that I am very different, that my conviction changed.
That would be neither true, nor honest.
Figure 14: Dr. Milada Horáková facing her accusers (Source: ABS)
93 | P a g e
     
 
                             
                         
                               
                             
                                       
                         
                             
                               
                       
                        
On the morning of June 8, 1950, the accused were handed their sentences; four life
imprisonments, five sentences from 15‐28 years, and four death sentences. Milada Horáková
was given an execution order: death by hanging. Jan Buchal, Dr. Oldřich Pecl, and Zaviš
Kalandra also were given the death sentence. Upon receiving her death sentence, she was
forced to state for the court that this was the “just verdict, in the name of the people” for her
“just crime.” One judge, Ludmila Brožová‐Polednová, after reading her verdict finished by
stating to the court, “While the woman who diligently and dedicatedly works in the Kontony
textile factory in Beroun, filling her quota and more on the automatic machines to help build
and strengthen our Republic, the defendant Horáková was underground putting together a
enemy gangs who will later destroy our great Republic” (Ceský Televize).
94 | P a g e
     
 
                            
  
 
Figure 15: The arraignment of Milada Horáková and the conclusion, p. 18. (Source: ABS)
95 | P a g e
     
 
 
                           
 
 
 
Figure 16: The arraignment of Milada Horáková and her twelve co‐defendants (Source: ABS)
96 | P a g e
     
 
                             
                             
       
 
Figure 17: The official document containing Dr. Horáková’s sentence. Her verdict is listed under
number 1: “JUDr. Hilada Horáková k trestu smrti.” JUDr. Milada Horáková is sentenced to
death. (Source: ABS)
97 | P a g e
     
 
                         
                               
                             
                            
                                       
                                   
                                    
                                        
                                
                                          
                                        
                            
                                
                           
                               
                                    
                                    
                                       
 
                                       
                                   
                             
In the days after her verdict, daughter Jana Horáková petitioned Gottwald for her
mother’s pardon but her efforts were in vain. All appealed their verdicts and all were
dismissed. The sentence would hold. Gottwald signed her verdict and penalty on June 24,
1950. Days before her execution, Milada Horáková wrote letters to her husband, daughter, and
family about her life, the lessons she wanted to live on, and the love she had for them all.
Milada wrote for her family about the courage one must possess to live one’s life and how to
live with decisions one must take. She discussed the value of life and the reality one must live
in – that it would not cater or mother anyone. In the letters, her song was one of an unceasing,
unbroken mother, wife, and woman. In one letter addressed to her family, she writes, “I go
with my head held high. One also has to know how to lose. That is no disgrace. An enemy also
does not lose honor if she is truthful and honorable. One falls in battle; what is life other than a
struggle?” Milada Horáková openly wrote about love and offered guidance and advice to her
daughter who would grow up without a mother. On the evening before her execution, she was
allowed fifteen minutes with her daughter, younger sister Věra, and brother‐in‐law in the boiler
room of Pankrác prison. Milada learned that her husband had managed to escape to Western
Germany and was alive. She tried to hold and kiss Jana one final time but the policeman would
not allow her to do so and the final minutes between Milada and her family had expired. Her
final words to her family were ones of love and that she acted with her heart and chosen a life
rightly.
On the morning of June 27, 1950, the four were led to the inner circle of the prison at
4:30 in the morning. Milada was selected to go last and she looked onward as her fellow
countrymen were executed. Finally, the guard turned to Milada and ushered her to the
98 | P a g e
     
 
                                     
                                     
               
                      
           
platform. Her last words were, “I’m falling, falling. I lost this battle. I leave honorably. I love
this land, I love these people, build prosperity for them. I leave without hatred for you. I wish
you this, I wish you . . .”
At 5 o’clock and 35 minutes, Milada Horáková’s life ended.
She was 48 years old.
99 | P a g e
     
 
 
         
 
                             
                               
                               
                           
                                   
                             
                                   
                                     
                               
                                      
                         
                              
                           
                             
                               
                                
                             
                    
8 

Indoctrination of the New Society
Although her show trial ended in 1950, the trials continued to terrorize the country of
Czechoslovakia over the next decade although began to decline in 1954. The show trial of
Milada Horáková marked the beginning of Stalinism in the land and served as a catalyst for
change. Throughout the late 1940s, many Czechs resisted the emergence of the Communist
Party and did not subscribe to their agenda as can be witnessed by the many who fled the
country or went underground to form a resistance movement. With the arrest of Milada
Horáková and the heavily publicized trial in 1950, it sent a clear message to the citizens of the
country: deviate and die. The trial was the first of its kind in the country and created the
foundation for more arrests, more trials, and a media frenzy that captivated a country. The
trial led to over 600 CNSP members of her party to be imprisoned or executed. This is data that
was recorded. However the actual number of forced disappearances, suspicious deaths, or
private trials conducted by the StB is not reflected in this number. According to information
from the Czech Office for Documentation of Crimes of Communism (UDV), “there were 350
executions carried out in Czechoslovakia from 1948 – 1958, of which most were of people
convicted of political crimes such as treason, espionage and sabotage” (CTK 1). Over that ten
year time, we can extract the amount of violence and perversion of justice in the land.
However, upon close examination by a report filed in 1968, the carnage reached its apex
following the show trial of Horáková et al. To illustrate
100 | P a g e
     
 
                         
                             
                            
                           
                          
                       
                       
                                     
                               
   
                           
                             
                      
                                 
                             
                               
                             
                                
                           
                                 
                       
                                 
                   
                            
The figure for death sentences was also high: between October 1948 and the
end of 1952 the State Court imposed 233 sentences of death, of which 178 were
carried out. The number of death sentences pending was so great that early in
1951 the Ministry of Justice gave the following reason for a delay in bringing
cases to court: ‘Earlier convictions in all these cases are impossible, because we
should have death sentences accumulating in too short a space of time.’
Central Committee of the Czechoslovak Communist Party 56.
In comparing data from 1948 – 1958 in the context of the year 1948‐1952, we can see that the
death toll by the Communists had reached a climax – especially in the year following her
execution.
The social consequences and impact of the show trial were felt throughout the country
and were instrumental in shaping a society in how they remembered the trial of Milada
Horáková in formative Communist years. During the mid‐century, Czechoslovak society was
stunned by her trial and became a chronicle of oral tradition outside the country by those who
managed to escape. From a “judicial” standpoint, Milada Horáková’s trial served as the
impetus to the show trial of Rudolf Slánský and his fellow Communist colleagues in 1951‐1952.
Others trial victims such as Slánský and Husák would also be historically remembered for their
lives in 1968 and the charges dismissed a decade after their executions. Cases and show trials
such as Slánský, Kadar, and Husák’s were widely known and discussed in journals throughout
the second half of the 20th
century underscoring one blatant question – why was the case of
Milada Horáková excluded from judicial and human rights documentation? Arguably, many
scholars have overlooked her case and have not researched the impact of the case until now.
Male‐dominated research studies throughout the mid‐century highlights a gendered approach
in how history is remembered. Studies focusing on Czechoslovakia during this time center on
101 | P a g e
     
 
                           
                     
                                
                               
                   
                       
                             
                                  
                       
                              
                         
                       
                          
                           
                             
                       
                       
                           
                               
                           
                               
economic and political elements but do not weave in the feminine narrative or sociological
studies surrounding women in general. Moreover, feminist, cultural, and anthropological
studies were not introduced in the region until after the Velvet Revolution of 1989. Lastly, her
exclusion is indisputably attributed in part to an overall disinterest in the region as displayed by
Western European dominance in the research and academic forums.
Although these cases are important in uncovering the past and establishing Communist
judicial patterns or recreating a collective historical foundation, one is left with the sense of
wonder why her case has not been academically braided into the research up until now? This is
a question that further research should approach going forward addressing the general
question of gender in relationship to remembrance in the region by the West. Slánský’s show
trial was heavily studied in Czechoslovakia outside the country and throughout the following
decades. Interestingly, many studies during those tumultuous years conducted on the
Czechoslovak purges in the early 1950s surrounded Slánský without regard to Horáková. As
aforementioned, the amount of research conducted on the show trial of Milada Horáková has
been exceedingly slim to none which may be attributed in part to masculine traditions of
academic research which, hitherto, had focused on traditional masculine research topics in
Czechoslovakia. Research during the mid‐century was heavily dominated by male researchers
who were conducting studies on topics that did not highlight the injustice or the
commencement of the trials led by Horáková. Through this, we can deduce that research and
the act of remembrance in Central Europe was male‐oriented, biased, and chauvinist. Perhaps
the only piece penned on the execution of Milada Horáková as it relates to feminism and
102 | P a g e
     
 
                                  
    
                       
                       
                            
                        
                            
                             
                            
                       
                       
                             
                            
                               
                       
                             
                             
                       
                                 
                       
                            
                                
                           
                
human rights were by Eleanor Roosevelt on October 24, 1950 in the St. Petersburg Times. In it,
she wrote
Dr. Horáková admitted to the crime of wanting free elections under international
supervision and of wanting to change the present rule of terror in
Czechoslovakia. Her last words were that she was content to die for what she
had done. Women's organizations all over the world protested the sentence and
execution, but protests of that kind are not heard very loudly in some countries.
A spirit like that of Dr. Horáková, however, will live on and inspire other people
to fight for things in which they believe. When these things are freedom, justice,
and fundamental human rights, they must in the end win out.
Roosevelt 1.
This missing piece in socio‐historical research exposes a gap in academic studies that has not
been allocated to women's issues and gender strife. Modern studies which take into account
the show trial of Slánský with regard to the social value and importance Horáková’s trial served
may adjust Slánský hypotheses and arguments surrounding the Czechoslovak show trial.
Dr. Milada Horáková’s trial was a social vehicle for reform in all capacities of the
country. The trials that followed from 1950‐1954 were not just specific to political members,
but encompassed social or religious dissidents such as Catholics, Jews, professors, and
homosexuals. In one report, “there was a time when the Ministry of Justice was forced to
request a breathing‐space because the accumulated death sentences could not technically be
carried out. And this happened in a country with democratic traditions, an advanced industrial
economy, and a high level of culture” (Pelikan 27). The carnage and terror in Prague through
propaganda like the show trials would eventually prevail and was not specifically allocated to
political liquidation as exemplified by Horáková. For example
103 | P a g e
     
 
                         
                               
                        
                         
                              
                   
                       
                               
                             
                                 
                            
                           
                           
                        
                               
                       
                              
                             
                             
                             
                         
                     
                                 
                     
                           
The individual citizen could no longer defend his rights, even over what seemed
minor breaches of the law; later, he found he had been deprived of his rights in
trials where his life was at stake. The lawlessness was indiscriminate: ordinary
citizens holding no official position and men prominent in public life were equally
vulnerable. It can be said that the monster trials had their origins in the first
occasion that the law was violated in a ‘minor case.’
Central Committee of the Czechoslovak Communist Party 144.
Furthermore, due to the fact that the original Czech penal code was dismissed and the Soviet
laws in place, there were no such protocols or protection for minorities, people of “subversion,”
or indicted individuals to contest their charges or file an appeal thus paving the way for the
horrific show trials to occur. For Horáková, an experienced lawyer and leading women’s rights
advocate, she did not have a fair or fighting chance against the dictatorship.
Milada Horáková was an agent of social change throughout her life and pioneered rights
for minorities, refugees, underrepresented citizens in society, and for women. Such examples
can be witnessed by viewing her body of work in the Women's National Council, achievement in
academia, prominence in Parliament, engagement with political powerhouses in and outside of
Czechoslovakia, and advocacy for human rights in her country. She was the embodiment of the
democratic values outlined by Tomáš Garrigue Masaryk in the First Republic in 1918 for a
modern and free Czechoslovakia. The Communists believed that she did not possess the
“feminine” character of self‐sacrifice or subservience to a maternal role in the family. Women
possessing an independent mind and rights were discouraged and grounds for treachery as
holding “Western” ideals. After the trial of Horáková, in 1950
. . . to the end of Communist rule, the ideal ‘socialist woman’ was a good worker
and competent professional, a caring mother and wife, and an enthusiastic
comrade. A woman was complete only if all these roles were filled. Women
104 | P a g e
     
 
                           
                           
                     
                      
                         
                       
                             
                              
                   
                               
                            
                           
                           
                         
                         
                             
                             
                             
                             
                         
                           
                                     
                               
                        
were perceived as having a ‘maternal role’, a ‘worker role’, and a ‘family role’,
multiple demands which had no male equivalents. In addition, the ideal of a
socialist family – democratic and collectivist – ignored women’s burden of
unpaid domestic work. Women were under tremendous pressure to justify their
choices, whether they chose to work or to stay at home with children.
Occhipinti 14.
After the February coup d’état in 1948 and the execution of Milada Horáková, women were
discouraged from continuing a life emulating hers. Her execution marked the end of the Czech
women’s movement and gender equality progression. Under Czechoslovak Communism,
women were instructed to return to the traditional role of the mother and homemaker as a
fixture to uphold the strong working‐class Communist family. In short, emphasis on being a
mother equated to being a contributing member of society as much as employment.
Horáková belonged to the principles set forth by Masaryk (1918‐1935) and virtues in the
Second Republic (1940‐1945 (in exile), 1945‐1948) under Edvard Beneš  ‐‐ she was, in other
words, what the Communists referred to as "modern" and “bourgeois” ‐‐ both politically and
culturally speaking. By the elimination of such values combined with her public execution, the
moment marked a turning point in Czech society as acceptance and moving citizens to subject
status that was against all fundamental principles at that time. While the newly appointed
leaders in the Czech Communist Cabinet were eager to prove themselves to Stalin and have
communism in Czechoslovakia succeed, the aging dictator focused his final years on collective
agriculturalism and economics in the satellite states but also the instilment of Stalinist cultural
values such as the role of the family, a woman's role, and atheism. This was crucial in the
creation of a Communist state and arguably was a battle to convince the country to fortify
Moscow. Czechoslovakia was known for its independent thinking, intelligentsia, and was the
105 | P a g e
     
 
                             
                               
                             
                         
                             
                                  
                             
                           
                            
                             
                                  
                             
                              
                             
                           
                       
                 
                             
                                
                         
                                  
                                 
most developed country by the time of the February 1948 putsch. Dr. Horáková’s show
trial and execution was the catalyst that ignited social change and was the ultimate piece of
propaganda for subjugation and conformity via fear. The show trial was completely novel and
served as an unchartered vessel into the Czechoslovak psychological minds that impacted and
revolutionized Czech history. It was a moment in a culture where criticism was completely
void. Her show trial rocked and continued to ripple the society in all facets ranging from the
arts to academics in the years immediately following. Some have called the immediate
aftermath of her show trial in Czechoslovak history as a social “rebirth” and “revaluation”
(Viney 466). As Viney notes in 1953, “sometimes the connections between political and artistic
purges are clear enough, but the decisive discussions are never public, and the weight of
personal conflict and intrigue has often to be gauged a posteriori” (Viney 466). A show trial was
used a tool to terrorize and systematically control the Czechoslovak society and the role the
populace played in the perverted system of justice was equally as important. For example, the
involvement of that the community endorsed ‐‐ from either busing in people to watch the trial,
issuing tickets for the courtroom, having citizens write in their "punishments" for Horáková, and
the short wave radio/television ‐‐ these were all propaganda surrounding the central figure
(Horáková) that was the catalyst in social change.
The show trial was propaganda but the role the community served within that cog was
almost brought to a fever pitch in 1950. It was hysteria. A frenzy. As politics
were established, the social aspect of change under Stalinism in Czechoslovakia was successful
mainly because of the execution of Milada Horáková. Her murder was to serve as a visual and
physical consequence for all those who wished to follow her "fate," or pursuits in life. Purging
106 | P a g e
     
 
                         
                           
                               
                           
                                  
                             
                         
                            
                            
                              
                               
                              
                           
                      
                             
                             
                              
                             
                               
                       
                          
                           
her from society would otherwise eliminate any societal forces that would have otherwise
challenged Sovietization at the apex of Stalinism in Czechoslovakia. I believe Milada Horáková
was the catalyst in being the element of social change in Czechoslovakia and, without her show
trial, Communism would have failed in the otherwise democratic state earlier than 1989 and
would have not been as successful as it was in overhauling popular opinion. If the trial and
related terror had not transformed the society, the protests and revolution in Hungary in 1956
would have garnered the attention and action in neighboring Czechoslovakia who would have
also risen up against the persecution. In 1949, student protests were also occurring throughout
universities in Prague and Brno resulting in arrests and murders. With these arrests coupled
with the trials and application of Soviet justice, social dissidence began to wane. The publicized
execution of Milada Horáková was the catalyst to mark the climax of Stalinism and was the
event that changed the society from 1950 onward. Her death would grant public passivity via
fear, ultimately giving Czech Communist leaders praise, and would play into the machine that
saw the satellite state submerged into four decades of brutal occupation.
By the 1960s, conformity was the norm and the Sovietization was complete, less a small
fraction led by artists and authors such as Václav Havel of underground movements that would
emerge during Prague Spring in 1968. Although the country fell into darkness and behind the
Iron Curtain for four decades, the spirit and the legacy people like Milada Horáková bestowed
to her citizens would not be forgotten after the Velvet Revolution. Although many of the
materials and information surrounding her trial remain classified, some information has been
illuminated by scholars, historians, and advocates. In 2005, Czech Radio’s Marek Janac explains
his journey into the audio recordings that he gained access to. He states
107 | P a g e
     
 
                           
                        
                         
                               
                       
                     
                         
                          
                              
    
   
                           
                               
                               
                              
                         
                              
                             
                                   
                           
                         
                         
                               
                              
                           
                             
I was struck by the fact that the original broadcast by Czechoslovak Radio only
‘summed up’ Mrs. Horáková’s final statements. I became curious over what had
happened to the original recording. In contact with the National Archive we
found out about the existence of three old boxes of dusty magnetic tape . . .
there are several differences: in the official version sentences or parts of
sentences were completely cut. For example, an answer ends mid‐ sentence
where Mrs. Horáková talks about Czechoslovakia’s first presidents . . . and how
for her they had always been an inspiration. The Communists of course weren’t
happy about it and they couldn’t use it. On the tape, Milada Horáková stands by
her principles.
Velinger 1.
From his experience, we are discovering more information to weave into the current research
taking place and to build on or explain the foundation that currently exists. Most of these
entries and studies can be found in the Czech language and furthermore, only a fraction of
these have been translated into the English language. As indicated by Velinger, much of the
information still remains classified or “missing” perhaps due to the censorship by the
Communists. As he prepares for a multimedia project, he discloses that “the three reels we
have found when they went into unmarked boxes at the National Archive that were handed
over by the Justice Ministry after 1989 – we’ve got tapes labeled 23‐25 which means 22 are still
missing – plus two reels on which the verdicts were recorded” (Velinger 1).
Conducting an interview in August 2009 with the president of the Czech Confederation
of Political Prisoners, MUDr. Naděžda Kavalírová indicated to me that these unmarked boxes
were deliberate – people working at the Justice Ministry knew of the significance and hid and
spread the tapes throughout the vaults. She continued to explain that had the boxes containing
the comprehensive trial been marked or the reels labeled, they would have been destroyed
immediately after 1989 for the implications of those involved would have been too great.
108 | P a g e
     
 
                                    
                               
                                       
                               
                              
                                   
                        
                       
                         
                               
                           
                         
                                
                             
                           
                         
                              
                               
                            
                                    
                           
                             
Twenty years later this also seems to be in the case. In June of 2009, the current Communist
party, a small percentage in the Czech political forum, fought against a Czech program that was
to air a documentary on the show trial. This may be due to the fact that many of the
Communists involved in the case are still alive and/or active in the party either directly or
indirectly. Speaking in a letter addressed to the program, Vojtěch Filip, leader of the current
Communist Party (KSČM) stated that “the programme is very likely not to be objective . . . also
adheres to the past and encourages primitive anti‐Communism” (Czech News Agency 1).
Despite corresponding reports and documentation not being released in its entirety, her
sentence was rehabilitated in 1968 and Horáková was fully acquitted in 1990.
It is important that research into the show trials is collective rather than selective if one
is to compile a comprehensive understanding of the cultural Communist climate and plight for
democracy and most importantly, not to take away the significance of marginalized narratives
such as Horáková’s. With that said, cases such as Slánský’s, Husák’s, and Horáková’s are just a
fraction of the histories still being discovered as the Czechs and Slovaks sift through the
information available of the tumultuous 20th
century history. In 2007‐present, a case was
brought to trail to try former prosecutor Ludmila Brožová‐Polednová for her involvement with
the trial and execution of Milada Horáková. After many court proceedings and appeals on the
grounds of failing health, a jury convicted and sentenced her for her involvement in the 1950
trial in Prague. Brožová‐Polednová is currently serving out her sentence yet continues to apply
for an appeal. This is a step forward and a watershed moment in Czech jurisprudence but it is
also shadowed by a genderized approach in prosecuting crimes under the Communist regime.
For example, in 2003, the police attempted to prosecute the chief investigator of the StB
109 | P a g e
     
 
                             
                              
                       
                                
                               
             
                           
                         
                                 
                                 
                                       
                                   
                           
                                 
      
Moucka in the Horáková case but the attorney’s office halted the prosecution that same year
and ultimately withdrew from indicting him in his involvement (CTK 2). This leaves one almost
incapable of divorcing the gender aspect for both Moucka and Brožová‐Polednová were
involved in the case but the latter was the only individual brought to justice. Going forward,
this is also an element that needs further exploration in uncovering perhaps a gender bias in
Czech judicial proceedings and assigning accountability.
Although much is still left to be researched and chronicled on the Czech and
international stage, one can deduce regardless of the sources available that the Czechoslovak
show trials in the 1950s to satiate Stalin and Gottwald were an abhorrent period in history that
rivals, if not mirrors, Nazism. As the countries under Stalin continue to emerge and come to
terms with their troubled past, as well as society for their role in the show trials, it surely will be
a long, arduous path yet one that is needed to reconcile in order to ultimately move forward.
Remembering and recounting the legacy Milada Horáková pioneered is one part of the social
vessel to return to the ideals of a robust, free democratic society and progressing as a country
in post‐Communist times.
110 | P a g e
     
 
       
 
                                      
                                     
                             
                                    
                               
                                
                                  
                                  
                           
                             
                             
                       
                            
                           
                                 
                              
              
                           
                           
9 

Singing the Silenced Song
Václav Havel once wrote, “Hope is a state of mind, not of the world. Hope, in this deep
and powerful sense is not the same as joy that things are going well, or willingness to invest in
enterprises that are obviously heading for success, but rather an ability to work for something
because it is good.” This excerpt he wrote in The Power of the Powerless can be associated with
the life, dedication, and work that Dr. Milada Horáková created during her short time on this
earth. As a woman, politician, advocate, and above all, a Czech, she followed hope and fought
for what it stood for to the bitter end and ultimately, her death. She devoted herself tirelessly
to causes she believed in or what was “good” for her country, family, and victims of tyranny.
Although she had lived under the confines and social restrictions of the Habsburg monarchy,
the Nazis, and the Communist occupation, the sheer volume of work and legislation she put
into place is magnanimous. Through steadfast adversity, she was able to propel the Czech
women’s rights movement, refugee aid programs, and organizations to rehabilitate victims of
the Second World War. With the rise of Communism, however, many of these organizations
with which she was affiliated were shut down and extinguished. The Women’s National
Council’s office was seized and nationalized to the state the same year she was arrested by the
StB. It would sit dormant until 1989 when clubs and associations struggled to reclaim their
property with the fall of Communism.
As the Czechs continue their journey in contemporary society, the life and legacy of
Milada Horáková is being illuminated and pondered by the younger generation and their quest
111 | P a g e
     
 
                            
                           
                                
                             
                               
                               
                                 
                           
                       
                             
                       
                           
                             
                           
                               
                             
                               
                             
                                 
                                     
                                       
                                  
to find the truth. Currently, the younger generation is searching and probing the formative,
although bleak, time period before their era to understand their Czech history, identity, family
narrative, and to ultimately alter their future so that history does not repeat itself. In Prague,
there is a sense of urgency amongst young adults, professors, and historians to release the
information of their Communist past in hopes to advance and heal the Czech mentality of their
surviving elders. In addition, their call to bring the show trials and the historical consequences
of life under Communism to light is a timely objective as the Czech political sphere continues to
campaign against the Communist Party (KSČM) in Parliament. Milada Horáková’s legacy is one
of historical, enduring importance that should the public collectively take into consideration
and learn from, would transcend any rise in Czech Communist politics in contemporary society.
Milada Horáková’s life, although ended more than half a century ago, currently
continues to influence and restore the women’s rights movement in the Czech Republic after
the fall of communism. Her presence in politics and socio‐historical memory endures. Her
narrative guides inclusive human rights visions of Czech advocates and political prisoners of the
21st
century. As a beacon of democracy and fearlessness, the heroic account of Milada
Horáková is a significant piece in this mosaic. It is through her enduring determination,
resilience, and contribution to history that has made her one of the foremost symbols of what
one person can achieve in the face of extreme adversity. Understanding and learning of Milada
Horáková’s life, spirit, and vision is a voyage into the very heart and essence of courage leading
every one of us who learn of her story to strive to obtain the bravery she possessed in fulfilling
our own destiny that is free from those who wish to harm us, void of the powers that wish to
silence us, and provide the strength to ultimately allow us to live in a world of hope.
112 | P a g e
     
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                              
                              
                              
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
                  
            
   
Don’t feel sorry for me! I lived a beautiful life. I accept my punishment with
resignation and submit to it humbly. My conscience is clear and I hope and believe
and pray that I shall also pass the test of the highest court, of God.
The last letter of Milada Horáková to her family
scribbled just moments before her execution,
June 27, 1950.
113 | P a g e
     
 
 
 
   
                              
                        
                                   
    
                               
                            
                           
                              
                              
              
                              
                                
                       
                 
                                   
                             
   
                           
                                     
   
                             
                               
       
                       
                            
                               
                                
                                
End Notes
The last letters Milada Horáková wrote in prison were never delivered to their addresses. The
recipients included her husband, mother‐in‐law, daughter, and sister Věra. Instead, they were
seized by the Communists and were finally published in 1990, proving too late for all but one –
daughter Jana.
During the time her mother was in prison and after her death, Jana Horáková was stigmatized
by the Communists and was put under surveillance. The Party requested that her classmates
and friends report on any suspicious activity or information. She was followed daily.
In December 1949, Bohuslav Horák managed to escape the StB to West Germany. Mr. Horák
never saw Milada Horáková in Pankrác Prison. He immigrated to the United States and never
publically discussed the trial of Milada Horáková.
Milada Horáková’s body was never recovered or buried. Years after her execution, it has been
reported, the Communists placed her ashes in a mass, unmarked grave on the city lines. In
Prague, the famous Vyšehrad Cemetery has erected a monument and commemorates annually
the day of her execution with a memorial service.
On 27 June 2004, on an anniversary of her execution, it was announced that the day would be
made a memorial day going forward for the “Commemoration day of the victims of the
Communist regime.”
In 2005, Czech filmmaker Martin Vadaš was given access to the uncensored original recording
of the show trial of Milada Horáková which he plans on creating a movie based on the events of
her life.
In 2006, daughter Jana (Horáková) Kanská was given the honorable Medal of Freedom by the
city of Prague in regards to the individuals and organizations who were opposed to tyranny in
all its forms.
In 2007, surviving prosecutor and Judge Ludmila Brožová‐Polednová, 86 years old, was
arrested and charged with capital murder of the execution of Milada Horáková. After partaking
in the show trial, it is reported that she willfully and freely attended her execution and
remarked, “Suffocate the bitch, and make sure her neck doesn’t snap when you drop her.” She
is currently, and ironically, serving her 6 year sentence at Pankrác Prison in Prague. Her appeal
114 | P a g e
     
 
                                  
         
                     
                              
                                         
                                
 
                          
                         
                            
                                   
      
                           
                         
was heard on grounds of her failing health and following orders, but lost her appeal. She began
her sentence in March 2009.
In March 2010, Brožová‐Polednová appealed again under grounds of presidential amnesty
which would protect against her actions under Communism. A verdict has not been reached.
In 2008, the opera “Zitra se bude. . .” (Tomorrow, it will be . . .) premiered at the Prague Opera
House on the life of Milada Horáková and received praising acclaim. It was written by Aleš
Brežina.
Currently, the Women’s National Council’s building has not been returned to the organization.
Members have held rallies outside the building and have submitted petitions to the
government yet al requests have been denied. Today, officers from the Prague City Council
reside in the building. It is currently being contested in court. It is located at Ve Smeckach
26/594, Prague 1.
Today, visitors and citizens can visit renamed streets and squares throughout the country that
have been dedicated to the life, memory, and legacy of Milada Horáková.
115 | P a g e
     
 
 
 
 
                     
 
                   
 
             
 
 
          
 
 
   
           
 
   
                           
              
 
    
                         
               
 
    
           
 
 
Bibliography
Letters by Dr. Milada Horáková from Pankrác Prison, June 24–27, 1950.
Central Committee of the Czechoslovak Communist Party. “Final Report,” 1968.
"Československé parlamentní volby 1946," Československá volební statistika.
http://www.czso.cz/csu/2008edicniplan.nsf/t/CD003EAADE/$File/422008k03.pdf
“Proces H,” Ceske Televize, 2009. http://www.ceskatelevize.cz/program/10153697395‐
31.05.2009‐22:00‐2.html
Beran, Karel
“Pred soudem lidu,” Prague, 1950. pp.5ff.
Brzezinski, Zbigniew
“The Pattern of Political Purges,” Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social
Science,” Vol. 317, May 1958, pp. 79‐87.
Byrnes, Robert
“The Climax of Stalinism: 1950‐1953,” Annals of the American Academy of Political and
Social Science, Vol. 317, May 1958, pp. 8‐11.
Cameron, Rob
“Jana Horáková‐Kanská,” CeskyRuzhlas.cz, 23 May 2007.
http://www.radio.cz/en/article/91629
116 | P a g e
     
 
 
 
   
                       
   
 
   
                   
                  
 
   
                           
 
 
   
                           
         
 
   
                         
   
 
       
                     
 
     
                     
                      
             
Doležalová, Markéta
“Milada Horáková (1901‐1950),” The Institute for the Study of the Totalitarian Regimes,
2007.
Dowling, Maria
“Friends, Nazis, and Communists: The Double Persecution of Antonia Kleinerová,”
Quaker Studies, Vol. 8, No. 2, 2004, pp. 226‐239.
Duchacek, Ivo
“The February Coup in Czechoslovakia,” World Politics, Vol. 2, No. 4, Jul. 1950, pp. 511‐
532.
Feinberg, Melissa
“Gender and the Politics of Difference in the Czech Lands after Munich,” East European
politics and Societies, Sage, 2003.
Kusin, Vladimir
“Review: The Trials: Czechoslovak Experience,” Soviet Studies, Vol. 22, No. 4, Apr. 1971,
pp. 623‐630.
Hodos, George, H.
“Show Trials: Stalinist Purges in Eastern Europe, 1948‐1954,” Praeger Publishers, 1987.
Homerová, Marie
“An International Conspiracy Against the Republic: The First Post‐War Political Show
Trials in Czechoslovakia,” Central European Journal of International & Security Studies,
Vol. 2, Issue 1, May 2008.
117 | P a g e
     
 
 
   
                         
         
 
   
                         
             
 
   
                       
         
 
   
                 
 
   
                       
 
         
                       
             
 
       
                   
                           
 
 
 
Iggers, Wilma
“Women of Prague: Ethnic Diversity and Social Change from the Eighteenth Century to
the Present,” Berghahn Books, 1995.
Kubat, Daniel
“Communist Use of the Czechoslovak Parliament Since World War II,” Slavic Review, Vol.
20, No. 4, Dec. 1961, pp. 695‐700.
Occhipinti, Laurie
“Two Steps Back?: Anti‐Feminism in Eastern Europe,” Anthropology Today, Vol. 12, No.
6, Dec. 1996, pp. 13‐18.
Pelikán, Jiří
“The Czechoslovak Political Trials: 1950‐1954.” Stanford University Press, 1971.
Roosevelt, Eleanor
“World’s Women Honor Czech Freedom Lover,” St. Petersburg Times, Oct. 24, 1950.
Roman, David and Choi, Susanne
“Forgiveness and Transitional Justice in the Czech Republic,” The Journal of Conflict
Resolution, Vol. 50, No. 3, Jun. 2006.
Skilling, Gordon H.
“People’s Democracy, the Proletarian Dictatorship and the Czechoslovak Path to
Socialism,” American Slavic and East European Review, Vol. 10, No. 2, Apr. 1951, pp.
100‐116.
118 | P a g e
     
 
   
     
 
   
                     
     
       
                        
             
 
   
                     
             
 
 
         
 
 
                           
        
                         
                          
         
 
                           
                           
     
Svodboda, Dalibor
“Milada Horáková,” 2008.
Velinger, Jan.
“Czech Radio uncovers long‐lost audio from Milada Horáková’s trial,” Radio Prague,
Nov. 21, 2005.
Viney, D. E.
“Czech Culture and the ‘New Spirit’. 1948‐1952,” The Slavonic and East European
Review, Vol. 31, No. 77, pp. 466‐494.
Zahra, Tara
“Review: Elusive Equality: Gender, Citizenship, and the Limits of Democracy in
Czechoslovakia, 1918‐1950,” University of Pittsburgh Press, 2006.
Newspapers, Press Releases, and Radio
“Communists cry foul at Czech TV documentary on Horáková show trial,” Czech News Agency,
Jun. 3 2009. http://www.radio.cz/en/article/116919
“Historian Finds Unique Reports from Horáková’s Cell,” Czech News Agency, Mar. 29, 2006.
“Milada Horáková – A Mountain That Refused To Move,” Provokator.org, 20 Mar. 2006.
“Milada Horáková,” PoliticalPrisoners.eu, 2006.
http://www.politicalprisoners.eu/
“Milada Horáková,” The News of the Czech Center, Vol. 12, No. 3,4, 2007.
“Now 50 Years after Process Against Milada Horáková and Others,” CTK National News Wire,
May 29, 2009.
119 | P a g e
     
 
                         
       
         
                         
 
“Recordings from Czech Communist Show Trial Shown in Court Today,” CTK National News

Wire, Oct. 17, 2007.

“Skryta Historie Zen,” Feminismus.cz, 2007.

“Women in World History: Case Studies: Milada Horáková,” George Mason University, 2008.

http://chnm.gmu.edu/wwh/d/25/wwh.html

120 | P a g e
     
 
 
   
 
 
     
                     
                    
 
   
         
 
 
   
                         
       
 
 
                   
   
 
 
                       
   
 
 
                             
     
 
Secondary Sources
Beek, Curt F
“Can Communism and Democracy Coexist? Beneš’ Answer,” American Slavic and East
European Review, Vol. 11, No. 3, Oct. 1952, pp. 189‐206.
Brown, Stephen
“Revisiting a Hero,” FrontPageMagazine.com, 2007.
http://www.brookesnews.com/080701Horakova.html
Cameron, Rob
“Communist Cry Foul at Czech TV Documentary on Horáková Show Trial,” Czech Radio,
Jun. 3, 2009.
http://www.radio.cz/en/article/116919
“High Court Overturns Guilty Verdict in Milada Horáková Murder Case,”

CeskyRuzhlas.cz, 2008.

http://www.radio.cz/en/article/100732
“Trial Begins for Former Prosecutor Who Helped Send Milada Horáková to Gallows,”
CeskyRuzhlas.cz, 2007.
http://www.radio.cz/en/article/96516
“Young Director to Bring Story of Milada Horáková to Silver Screen,” Czech Radio, Apr.
6, 2007.
http://www.radio.cz/en/article/90012
121 | P a g e
     
 
   
                         
     
 
   
                         
                   
                   
             
 
   
                   
 
 
   
                         
 
 
   
                         
 
 
    
                
 
 
   
             
Coste, Brutus
“Propaganda to Eastern Europe,” The Public Opinion Quarterly, Vol. 14, No. 4, Winter
1950‐1951, pp. 639‐666.
Duchacek, Ivo
“A “Loyal” Satellite: The Case of Czechoslovakia,” Annals of the American Academy of
Political and Social Science, Vol. 317, May 1958, pp. 115‐122.
“The Strategy of Communist Infiltration: Czechoslovakia 1944‐1948,” World Politics, Vol.
2 No. 3, Apr. 1950, pp. 345‐372.
Dudiková, Andrea
“Executions Haunt Czech Pensioner 57 Years after Trial,” Bloomberg.com, 2007.
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601085&sid=aisRO5XfvjWc&refer=euro
pe
Higgins, Bernie
“Looking at Czech society with both eyes open,” Czech Radio, Jul. 19, 2009.
http://www.radio.cz/en/article/118379
Kusin, Vladimir
“The Trials: Czechoslovak Experience,” Soviet Studies, Vol. 22, No. 4, Apr. 1971, pp. 623‐
630.
Lazarová, Daniela
“Watching the H‐Trial,” Czech Radio, Jun 21. 2009.
http://www.radio.cz/en/article/117419
London, Artur
“The Confession.” William Marrow and Company, 1970.
122 | P a g e
     
 
 
   
                         
                 
 
   
               
 
 
       
                 
                   
 
     
                   
                 
 
       
                   
    
 
   
                     
    
 
 
                       
 
McDermott, Kevin
“A “Polyphony of Voices?” Czech Popular Opinion and the Slánský Affair,” Slavic Review,
Vol. 67, No. 4, Winter 2008, pp. 840‐865.
Mejstrik, Martin
“Communist Prosecutor Brožová‐Polednová and the Nuremberg Trials,” 2007.
http://www.martinmejstrik.cz/article.asp?nDepartmentID=71&nArticleID=344&nLangua
geID=1
Olson, Kenneth G.
“Development of the Czechoslovak Propaganda Administration,” The Public Opinion
Quarterly, Vol. 13. No. 4, Winter, 1949‐1950, pp. 607‐618.
Porket, J. L.
“Czechoslovak Women under Soviet‐Type Socialism,” The Slavonic and East European
Review, Vol. 59, No. 2, Apr. 1981, pp. 241‐263.
Reisky de Dubnic, Vladimir
“Community Propaganda Methods: A case study on Czechoslovakia,” Frederick A.
Prageger, 1950.
Richter, Jan
“Communist Leaders Support Monument to Victims of Communism,” Czech Radio, Dec.
27, 2007.
http://www.radio.cz/en/article/99049
“Prague Memorial to Milada Horáková Sparks Controversy,” Czech Radio, Oct. 29, 2009.
http://www.radio.cz/en/article/121666
123 | P a g e
     
 
 
           
                       
         
 
     
                       
                   
                   
                         
 
   
                     
                 
                
 
   
                         
                        
     
 
     
                             
 
   
                           
     
 
 
Scheffel, David and Kandert, Josef.
“Politics and Culture in Czech Ethnography,” Anthropological Quarterly, Vol. 67, No. 1, J
Jan. 1994, pp. 15‐23.
Skilling, Gordon H.
“The Break‐Up of the Czechoslovak Coalition,” The Canadian Journal of Economics and
Political Science, Vol. 26, No. 3, Aug. 1960, pp. 396‐412.
“People’s Democracy, the Proletarian Dictatorship and the Czechoslovak Path to
Socialism,” American Slavic and East European Review, Vol. 10 No. 2, Apr. 1951.
Taborsky, Edward
“The Administration of Justice in a “People’s Democracy,” The American Political
Science Review, Vol. 49. No.2, Jun. 1955. pp, 402‐415.
“Communism in Czechoslovakia: 1948‐1960.” Princeton University Press, 1961.
Ulc, Otto
“Some Problems Relating to the Transfer of Inheritances from the United States to
Czechoslovakia,” The American Journal of Comparative Law, Vol. 14, No 1. Winter,
1965, pp. 142‐156.
Szasz, Bela
“Volunteers for the Gallows: Anatomy of a Show Trial,” W. W. Norton & Company, 1971.
Vaughan, David
“Letter from Prague – Remembering a woman who was not for turning,” Czech Radio,
May 29, 2005.
http://www.radio.cz/en/article/66952
124 | P a g e
     
 
                           
 
 
   
                     
 
 
 
   
                           
 
 
 
   
                         
     
 
 
         
 
 
                                     
 
 
                           
  
 
“Milada Horáková: Dignity in the face of fanaticism,” Czech Radio, Oct. 9, 2008.
http://www.radio.cz/en/article/109053
Velinger, Jan
“National Archive Analyzing New Milada Horáková Documents,” Czech Radio, May 9,
2006.
http://www.radio.cz/en/article/78679
Willoughby, Ian
“1950s Trial of Czech Kulak Subject of New Radio Documentary,” Czech Radio, Sep. 27,
2006.
http://www.radio.cz/en/article/83610
Zinner, Paul
“Problems of Communist Rule in Czechoslovakia,” World Politics, Vol. 4, No. 1, Oct.
1951, pp. 112‐129.
Newspapers, Press Releases, and Radio
CTK, “Ageing Czech Communist Prosecutor Must Go To Prison,” CeskeNoviny,cz, 2009.
http://www.ceskenoviny.cz/zpravy/brozova‐polednova‐pozada‐o‐preruseni‐
trestu/381389&id_seznam=784?id=381464
“Czech Prosecutor Gets Jail Time for State Execution 58 Years Ago,” Deutsche Presse‐Agentur,
2008.
http://www.topnews.in/czech‐prosecutor‐gets‐jail‐time‐state‐execution‐58‐years‐ago‐265721
125 | P a g e
     
 
 
                         
 
  
                   
 
 
“Ex‐Prosecutor on Trial for Helping to Stage One in 1950,” Aktualne.cz, 2007.
http://aktualne.centrum.cz/czechnews/clanek.phtml?id=511434
“Judicial Murderer Jailed for Six Years,” The Prague Post, 2009.
http://praguepost.com/news/939‐judicial‐murderer‐jailed‐for‐six‐years.html
126 | P a g e
     
 
 
 
   
 
 
           
     
 
               
       
     
 
 
 
           
     
       
 
 
 
Oral Histories
Interview conducted with MUDr. Naděžda Kavalírová

August 13, 2009

Director of the Confederation of Czechoslovak Political Prisoners

Konfederace politických vězňů České republiky
Prague, Czech Republic
~
Interview conducted with Mr. Zdeněk Mareš

August 3‐5, 2009

České Budějovice, Czech Republic

127 | P a g e
     
 
   
 
 
                       
                          
                           
                   
                     
                              
                           
                       
                         
                          
               
                     
                   
   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Author Biography
Adam Watkins earned his Bachelor of Arts degree in English from Southern
Connecticut State University in 2002. With a minor in French, the author studied
at Université de Bourgogne in Dijon, France in 2001 where he enrolled in the
Centre International d'Études Françaises. Upon finishing his degree and
certificate, Watkins earned his teaching certificate in Prague, Czech Republic in
2004. While living in Prague, he served as an English educator in the capital city
until 2006 when he departed to pursue graduate studies in the United States.
He completed his Master of Science degree in International and Area studies
with a focus on Central Europe from Central Connecticut State University in the
spring of 2010. Watkins intends on earning a Doctor of Philosophy degree in
comparative history of Central, Southeastern and Eastern Europe.
Adam Watkins is currently embarking on his research study entitled, “Dualism
and Non‐Belonging: The Projection of Homosexual Identity in Czechoslovak Art,
1948 ‐1989. “
128 | P a g e