The Uschla[a] (Untersuchung und Schlichtungs-Ausschuss, roughly translated as the Investigation and Settlement Committee[b]) was an internal Nazi Party tribunal[c] that was established by Adolf Hitler in 1925 to settle intra-party problems and disputes.

In examining membership applications, the Uschla applied the Nazi Party's racial policies in excluding Jews, along with Freemasons or anyone with communist or socialist ties.

The Uschla was patterned on the former honor courts of the German Imperial Army, and Party members could appeal to it to absolve them of any unjustified attacks on their character leveled by a comrade.

[6] When the Uschla first convened in January 1926, Hitler envisioned it at the top of a network of Party tribunals at the regional and local levels.

He was an ill fit for the task of conciliating the many petty quarrels among Party members and could not enforce his judgments without Hitler's support.

In January 1932, the continued increased growth in Party membership necessitated adding an additional assessor, Wilhelm Grimm.

In June 1932, to improve the tribunal's efficiency in handling an ever increasing workload, it was divided into three chambers, headed by Buch, Holzschuher and Grimm, each having its own separate geographical jurisdiction.

[13] Though theoretically independent judicial review boards, the Uschlas were highly dependent on and controlled by the Party political leaders at each level.

[14] Hitler found the Reichs-Uschla a very advantageous control mechanism, as he could sway or influence their actions by his power of appointment while at the same time diverting any unpopular decisions away from himself.

Although some Uschla staff possessed law degrees, tribunal members were not required to be lawyers, or even have formal legal training.

[18] An April 1931 directive added ordering a reprimand by the defendant's political leader, which included banning the holding of a Party office or appearing as a speaker for the movement.

[19] Reflecting the ongoing tension between the Party's political organization and its paramilitary wing, the Sturmabteilung (SA), jurisdictional issues plagued the Uschla for years.

It also left the undefined term "SA affairs" open to interpretation and argument, so little progress in settling the jurisdictional squabble resulted and the memorandum was repealed in December 1930.

[21] A further Party directive issued 15 April 1931 officially outlined the jurisdiction between the Uschlas and the SA and SS members, providing them with considerable protections.

These safeguards shielded SA and SS members from automatic, direct accountability to the Uschlas and tended to reinforce the independence of the paramilitary groups.

[22] In a new Reichs-Uschla directive of 1 January 1933, all Uschla members were designated autonomous Party officials not subject to being removed against their will by their political leaders.

Gau-Uschla chairmen were entitled to the rank and service uniform of a Deputy Gauleiter and the Reichs-Uschla Chairman to that of a department head of the Reichsleitung.

[23] A final relevant provision, contained in a directive of 17 February 1934, stipulated that before a proceeding against an SA or SS man was opened, his commanding officer was to be "notified" and given the opportunity to defend his subordinate at the trial.

On 2 June 1933, Buch and Grimm were named NSDAP Reichsleiters (Reich Leaders), the second-highest political rank in the Nazi Party.

[32] Nonetheless, Buch felt that Röhm and his fellow SA leaders should have faced charges before the Supreme Party Court, and he was not informed of their summary executions until after the fact.

Though no accurate figures exist as to the numbers expelled from the Party in the widespread purge, they included members of the political organization as well as the SA.

[34] Following the massive anti-Jewish pogrom of 9–10 November 1938 known as Kristallnacht, the Supreme Party Court's two Chambers each convened in a Sondersenat (Special Senate) and conducted sixteen trials involving some thirty of the perpetrators, mainly SA men, between 20 December 1938 and 9 February 1939.

This effectively whitewashed the vast majority of the violent crimes committed, including looting, assault, arson and the murder of 21 Jews.

The four defendants that did receive the harsher punishment of expulsion from the Party were those who had committed sexual crimes such as rape or indecent assault involving Jewish women, thus violating the Nazi prohibition against intermingling of the races; they were also tried in State court and imprisoned.

In addition, the Court wrote a report to the Reich Ministry of Justice recommending that no State investigations or criminal trials be held for those who had been acquitted.

Furthermore, Buch was ordered to remove all judges who had formal judicial experience and replace them with loyal Party comrades who could be trusted to arrive at the "correct" decisions.

[38] In August 1944, Bormann ordered almost all party judicial proceedings at every level, except for appeals, suspended to release personnel for the war effort.