No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
The punishment of War criminals: The Nuremberg Trial: (First part)
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 21 May 2009
Extract
When the International Military Tribunal on October 1, 1946, pronounced judgment on 22 Germans accused as major war criminals, a truly historic trial came to an end. It was the first such tribunal constituted by a number of Great Powers and in the interests of all the United Nations. Since the beginning of the modern state system, this was the first time that die leaders of a Great Power, its statesmen, soldiers, journalists and propagandists were held accountable for crimes against peace and humanity, which themselves were substantial innovations or developments. Ordinary war crimes, usually within the province of domestic military courts, were also for the first time tried by an international tribunal.
- Type
- Articles
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © T.M.C. Asser Press 1955
References
page 356 note 1 Altogether, the United States War Crimes program in all theaters comprised 956 cases in which 3306 defendants were tried. Following is a detailed breakdown of the trials and their results:
page 357 note 1 It has been estimated that Great Britain held 541 trials, Australia 275, France 271, the Netherlands 35, Poland 25, Norway 11, Canada 5, China 2, and Greece 1. Appleman, Alan, Military Tribunals and International Crimes (Indianapolis: The Bobbs-Merril Co., 1954), p. 265Google Scholar. As to the Netherlands this estimate appears to be incorrect. According to materials kindly prepared by Professor Verzijl the Netherlands data are:
See also Law Reports of Trials of War Criminals, Selected and Prepared by the United Nations War Crimes Commission (H.M. Stationary Office, London, 1949, Vol. XV), pp. XVI f.Google Scholar
page 358 note 1 Fenwick, Charles G., International Law (1924), p. 578Google Scholar; Stone, Julius, Legal Controls of International Conflict (1954), p. 356Google Scholar; Oppenheim, L., International Law, Vol. II (7th ed. by H. Lauterpacht, 1952), p. 611.Google Scholar
page 358 note 2 Phillipson, Coleman, Termination of War and Treaties of Peace, (1916), p. 246.Google Scholar
page 359 note 1 War and Peace Aims. Sp. Supp. No. I to the United Nations Review; 01 30, 1943), p. 116Google Scholar; see also History of the United Nations War Crimes Commission and the Development of the Laws of War (hereinafter referred to as “History”), compiled by the United Nations War Crimes Commission (H.M. Stationary Office, London, 1948), p. 90.Google Scholar
page 359 note 2 History, p. 106.Google Scholar
page 360 note 1 History, p. 107Google Scholar; see also: United Nations, The Charter and Judgment of the Nürnberg Tribunal. History and Analysis (hereinafter referred as “The Charter”). Memorandum submitted by the Secretary-General (U.N. Publications, Sales No. 1949. V. 7), p. 87.Google Scholar
page 360 note 2 Report of Jackson, Robert H., U.S. Representative to the International Conference on Military Trials (hereinafter referred to as “International Conference”), London 1945 (Department of State Publication 3080, 1949), p. 22, Doc. IV, and p. 28, Doc. V.Google Scholar
page 360 note 3 International Conference, Doc. IX, p. 55.Google Scholar
page 360 note 4 Ibid., Doc. LX, p. 420.
page 360 note 5 Ibid., p. 422; the English and French texts of Article 6, para. c, were amended by Protocol of Oct. 6, 1945, to bring them into harmony with the Russian text, ib. Doc. LXI, p. 429.
page 360 note 6 Ibid., p. VIII. These nations are: Australia, Belgium, Czechoslovakia, Denmark, Ethiopia, Greece, Haiti, Honduras, India, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Panama, Paraguay, Poland, Uruguay, Venezuela, and Yugoslavia.
page 361 note 1 History, p. 242, footnote 1 (c).Google Scholar
page 361 note 2 Ibid., p. 94.
page 361 note 3 International Conference, p. 18.Google Scholar
page 362 note 1 Ibid., p. 19.
page 362 note 2 Memorandum of January 22, 1945, prepared for President Roosevelt for his guidance at the Yalta Conference, ibid., p. 6.
page 362 note 3 Ibid., p. 28.
page 362 note 4 Ibid., pp. 33–35.
page 362 note 5 Ibid., pp. 35–36.
page 363 note 1 Ibid., p. 37.
page 363 note 2 Ibid., p. 22.
page 363 note 3 Ibid., p. 7.
page 363 note 4 Ibid., pp. 25–26.
page 364 note 3 Ibid., p. 8.
page 364 note 4 Lord Justice Lawrence (U.K.), Mr. Francis Biddle (U.S.A.), Professor Donnedieu de Vabres (France).
page 364 note 5 Ibid., p. 36.
page 364 note 6 Ibid., pp. 343, 385, 397, 400.
page 365 note 1 Ibid., p. 7.
page 365 note 2 Ibid., pp. 23, 30.
page 365 note 3 Ibid., pp. 41, 61.
page 365 note 4 Ibid., p. 56.
page 365 note 5 Ibid., pp. 86, 97.
page 365 note 6 Ibid., pp. 121, 128.
page 366 note 1 Ibid., p. 7, 8.
page 366 note 2 Ibid., pp. 26, 56.
page 366 note 3 Ibid., pp. 86, 97, 121.
page 366 note 4 Ibid., pp. 172, 173.
page 366 note 5 Ibid., pp. 150, 151.
page 366 note 6 Ibid., pp. 187, 196.
page 366 note 7 Ibid., pp. 224–226. In order to avoid any possibility of raising false hopes, the text of the draft Agreement of July 11, 1945, which provided for “accession” was changed in the final text to “adherence”.
page 366 note 8 The inclusion of neutral judges was considered by an unofficial body called the International Commission for Penal Reconstruction and Development. See History, p. 95.Google Scholar
page 366 note 9 International Conference, p. 5.Google Scholar
page 367 note 1 Ibid., p. 18.
page 367 note 2 Ibid., p. 24.
page 367 note 3 Ibid., pp. 57, 58.
page 367 note 4 Ibid., p. 82.
page 368 note 1 Ibid., p. 329.
page 368 note 2 Ibid., p. 331.
page 368 note 3 Ibid., pp. 328, 335, 336.
page 368 note 4 Ibid., pp. 197, 205, 351, 359, 373, 374, 378, 390–395.
page 368 note 5 Ibid., p. 423.
page 368 note 6 Trial of the Major war Criminals before the International Military Tribunal, Vol. I (1947), p. 218.Google Scholar
page 368 note 7 Intemationd Conference, p. 24Google Scholar, “American Draft of Definitive Proposal, presented to Foreign Ministers at San Francisco, April 1945.”
page 369 note 1 Ibid., pp. 4, 24.
page 369 note 2 Ibid., p. 87.
page 369 note 3 Ibid., p. 170.
page 369 note 4 See French and Soviet drafts of July 19 and 23, 1945Google Scholar, respectively, ibid., pp. 293, 327. The French proposed the following formula: “The policy of atrocities and persecutions against civilian populations.”
page 369 note 5 Ibid., pp. 329, 333.
page 369 note 6 Ibid., p. 361.
page 370 note 1 Ibid., p. 416.
page 370 note 2 Ibid., pp. 423, 429. The above text is reproduced as amended by the Protocol to Agreement and Charter, October 6, 1945. Prior to the amendment there was a semicolon between “war; or”. The semicolon would have divorced the first group of crimes from the connection with the words “in execution of or in connection with any crime…”.
page 370 note 3 Ibid., p. 24.
page 370 note 4 Ibid., pp. 395, 416. Trainin, A. N., Hitlerite Responsibility wider International Law [London, 1945].Google Scholar
page 370 note 5 Supra, pp. 366–368.Google Scholar
page 371 note 1 See History, pp. 180–187.Google Scholar
page 371 note 2 International Conference, p. 52.Google Scholar
page 371 note 3 Ibid., p. 98.
page 371 note 4 Ibid., p. 295.
page 371 note 5 Ibid., p. 298.
page 371 note 6 Ibid., p. 299.
page 372 note 1 Ibid., pp. 298, 303; see also pp. 377, 382, and p. 373 for a Soviet draft of definitions of the crime: “Aggression against or domination over other nations carried out by the European Axis Powers in violation of treaties, agreements and assurances.”
page 372 note 2 Ibid., pp. 377 f.
page 372 note 3 Ibid., pp. 328, 331, 337.
page 372 note 4 Ibid., p. 336.
page 372 note 5 Ibid., p. 294; see also pp. 273, 305, 375.
page 372 note 6 Ibid., pp. 383, 385.
page 372 note 7 Ibid., p. 386.
page 372 note 8 Ibid., pp. 303, 304, 305, 307, 308.
page 372 note 9 Ibid., pp. 307, 308.
page 373 note 1 Ibid., pp. 386, 387.
page 373 note 2 Ibid., p. 416; sec also pp. 387, 397.
page 373 note 3 Ibid., p. 394.
page 373 note 4 Ibid., pp. 395, 416.
page 373 note 5 Ibid., p. 24; see also pp. 51, 58, 65.
page 373 note 6 Ibid., p. 87; see also p. 99.
page 373 note 7 For Soviet plan, see ibid., p. 181, and for American plans, see pp. 58, 124, 181
page 374 note 1 Ibid., p. 197; see also p. 205, the British draft of July 11, 1945, which is identical on this point with the subcommittee draft.
page 374 note 2 Ibid., p. 296.
page 374 note 3 Ibid., pp. 327, 328.
page 374 note 4 Ibid., p. 332.
page 374 note 5 Ibid., p. 387.
page 374 note 6 Ibid., pp. 381, 382, 388.