Figure 1.-- |
|
The primary war crime trials were the International Military Tribunals in Germany and Japan. There were no international tribunals in Italy. There were also national trials in the occupied countries that focused more on local collaborators. The International War Crimes Trials introduced a new concept in international law, making the planning, preparing, initiating, or waging of war of aggression a crime. After World War II, the International Military Tribunal at Nurenberg (composed of a judge from Britain, France, the Soviet Union, and the United States) tried NAZI leaders. The International Military Tribunal for the Far East, at Tokyo (composed of a judge from Australia, Britain, Canada, (Nationalist) China, France, India, the Netherlands, New Zealand, the Philippines, the Soviet Union, and the United States) tried Japanese leaders. Both tribunals stressed in their proceedings that laubching a war of aggression "is not only an international crime; it is the supreme international crime". The two tribunals established the principle that only high government officials actually formulating or influencing governmental policy can be charged with "crimes against peace. Thus soldiers in an army who have a legal obligation to follow the orders of their government can not be procecuted for crimes against peace while the political leaders and ranking generals could. Low ranking individual could, however, be procecuted for individual acts of atroicities such as the murder of civilians. All of the occupied countries tried local collaborators. The Soviets controlled the trials in Eastern Europe. The trials in Western Europe wee conducted like the International Tribunals as real trials with judicial safeguards. Trials in Asia were more varied.
TheAllies and Soviets issued a declaration in Moscow concerning the procecution of war criminals (October 30, 1943). They decided to procecute Germans for attrocities committed in occupied Europe. They agreed the that "German officers and menand members of the NAZI party who have been responsble for or have taken a consenting part in attrocities and crime would be sent back to the countries in which were committed for prosecution.
The Allies and Soviets reached agreement on the creation of an International Military Tribunal to try major war criminals (August 8). The date was very important. It was 1 day before the United States dropped the atomic bomb on Hiroshima and the Soviet Union had not yet declared war on Japan. Thus the agreement only related to German and collaborationist war crimes in Europe. They decided to establish an International Military Tribunal (IMT) to try German war criminals. The IMT was to try thosecaccused of war crimes "whose offenses have no particular geographic location". The signees agreed that based on the Moscow Declaration that war criminals should still be returned to the countries where they committed their offenses. And they agreed that the IMT did not preclude national governments from establishing other courts to try war criminals in their country or Germany.
The primary war crime trials were the International Military Tribunals in Germany and Japan. There were no international tribunals in Italy. There were also national trials in the occupied countries that focused more on local collaborators. The International War Crimes Trials introduced a new concept in international law, making the planning, preparing, initiating, or waging of war of aggression a crime. Both tribunals stressed in their proceedings that laubching a war of aggression "is not only an international crime; it is the supreme international crime". The two tribunals established the principle that only high government officials actually formulating or influencing governmental policy can be charged with "crimes against peace. Thus soldiers in an army who have a legal obligation to follow the orders of their government can not be procecuted for crimes against peace while the political leaders and ranking generals could. Low ranking individual could, however, be procecuted for individual acts of atroicities such as the murder of civilians.
The Allies decided to try NAZI war criminals in Nuremberg. This was in part a symbolic gesture because Nuremberg was the heart of NAZI Germany, but the palace of justice in Nuremberg was on of the few facilities left standing in Germany large enough to accomodate the proceedings. Nuremberg was location of the annual NAZI Party Congresses. The chilling film, "Triumph of the Will" depicted one of these congresses. There were other reasons for holding the trials in Nuremberg, one in particular was that it was in the Western zone. The first trial of the NAZI leadership was held from November 20, 1945 to October 1, 1946. The International Military Tribunal (IMT) convened in the principal courtroom for criminal cases (room No. 600) in the Nuremberg Palace of Justice. It was the scene of many NAZI show trials. Allied leaders during the War had agreed to prosecute those responsible for war-crimes. After World War II, the International Military Tribunal at Nurenberg (composed of a judge from Britain, France, the Soviet Union, and the United States) tried NAZI leaders. President Harry S. Truman designated Supreme Court Justice Robert H. Jackson as the U.S. representative and chief counsel. He planned and organized the trial procedure and served as Chief Prosecutor for the United States. It was Jackson who recommended Nuremberg as the site for the trials. The Soviets wanted the trials held in Berlin. A compromise was reached. Berlin was to be the permanent seat of the IMT and that furture IMT trials could be held in Berlin. There were no further IMT trials, however, because of the Cold War. There were further trials, but none cinducted by the Soviets and Western Allies jointly. Each of the four Great Powers (England, France, the Soviet Union, and the United States) provided one judge and an alternate as well as the prosecutors. The first session of the International Military Tribunal was opened on October 18, 1945, in the Supreme Court Building in Berlin, which had become the seat of the Allied Control Council. Soviet judge, Iola T. Nikitschenko presided over the opening session. The prosecution presented indictments against 24 "major war criminals" and against 6 "criminal organizations": Hitler's Cabinet, the leadership corps of the Nazi party, the SS (party police) and SD (security police), the Gestapo, the SA and the General Staff and High Command of the Wehrmacht.
The International Military Tribunal for the Far East, at Tokyo (composed of a judge from Australia, Britain, Canada, (Nationalist) China, France, India, the Netherlands, New Zealand, the Philippines, the Soviet Union, and the United States) tried Japanese leaders.
The Tokyo War Crimes Trial defendents included a select group of generals, admirals and diplomats. Many Japanese believed that after these trials, war criminals had been justly tried and punished. The Tokyo Trials had, however, been much more narrowly focused than the comparable abnd better known trials in Germany. General Douglas MacArthur commaded the occupation force ans substantially influenced the judicial priceedings. He concluded that it was necessary to maintain governmental continuity in the form of the Emperor. This became official U.S. Government policy. As a result, the procedutors in the War Crimes trials scrupulously avoided any mention of Emperor Hirohito. The defendants out of loyalty to the Emperior did the same, despite the fact that it would have helped their defenses to claim that they were following his orders. When Tojo told his lawyer that "the subjects of Japan can never say or do anything against His Majesty's will," the prosecutors convinced him not to say that on the stand. The U.S. Goverment decesion to exempt Emperor Hirohito from culpability for the War and ensuing war crimes lessened the need for serious examination in Japan of individual and national responsibility. Many Japanese continued to believe that the Wat was a legitimate attempt to defend the country. Few Japanese were informed of the full extent of the crimes committed by the Japanese military in occupied countries. Most Japanese citizens immediately after the War were focused on the immedite task of survival and challenges of rebuilding Japan after the destructive Allied bombibng.
The Internatinal Military Tribunal (IMT) are the best known war crime trials resulting from World War II. They were, however, not the only trials in which the the United States participated.
The United States conducted war crimes trials in Europe under two other jurisdictions: 1) U.S. military tribunals at Nuernberg (RG 238) and 2) U.S. Army courts (RG 153 & RG 549).
All of the occupied countries tried local collaborators. The Soviets controlled the trials in Eastern Europe. The trials in Western Europe wee conducted like the International Tribunals as real trials with judicial safeguards. Trials in Asia were more varied.
Navigate the Boys' Historical Clothing Web Site:
[Return to Main Japanese World War II aftermath page]
[Return to Main mass killing page]
[Introduction]
[Activities]
[Biographies]
[Chronology]
[Clothing styles]
[Countries]
[Bibliographies]
[Contributions]
[FAQs]
[Glossaries]
[Images]
[Links]
[Registration]
[Tools]
[Boys' Clothing Home]