Evening star., 1945-12-02
Nuremberg TrioIs Fair
Despite Nuzi Protests
Commentator Says German Lead
ers Are Getting Real Justice
BIZ Raymond Moleu.

By Raymond Moley.
A good deal OF criticism has been
voiced in this country at our part in
the Nuremberg trials. Most Of this
criticism holds that the ex post facto
principle in Anglo American tradition
is being violated. The same point is
being made in the defense of Goering
and associates.
What are the facts and the law on
this ex post facto point? Is it true
that in Furnishing war criminals JUS
tice Robert H. Jackson and others
are violating the American constitu-
ton and tradition?
In answering these questions let us
examine the meaning of the ex post
facto principle and its application to
this case.
Blacks Law Dictionary is "a law passed
after the occurrence of fact or COM
mission Of an act which retrospectively
changes the legal consequences or rela-
tions of such fact or deed"
The laws which these defendants are
charged with violating existed long be-
fore these men came to power in Ger
many. They were embodied in treaties,
international pacts and the like. So
much for the laws.
Machinery by which they are being
tried-the court, the prosecuting agen-
cieS and the procedures ex post facto.
1t was created after the acts were
committed. 1t was created because
there was no existing machinery to
enforce the laws which existed
The test here is not the question Of
when the court, etc., were formed but
whether this court and the procedure
under which it operates conform to
the provisions and traditions in all
civilized countries for fair trial. The
whole setup does provide the defend
ants with such a trial.
An additional point is made by the
| defendants that they cannot be held
| personally responsible for what was
| done in the war by persons other than
| themselves and not under their direct
| orders.
The answer to this is two-fold In the
| first place proof will be provided that
they participated in the conspiracy
known as the Nazi party, whose avowed
| purpose was to commit aggression and,
| If necessary, to secure the fruits of
| aggression by war. This was q viola
| ton of the treaty obligations of Ger
| many and the Pact of Paris, to which
Germany subscribed. 1t was a con-
| spiracy to do an unlawful act. The
guilt of the defendants is not meas
ured by what would be just punishment
for such conspiracy, for 1t extends
to all the consequences which they
should have anticipated
| Having set in motion the illegal re-
sort to war, these leaders of a nation
| plunged into war marked by the
killing of innocent people They are
personally guilty of those killings This
follows the principle often applied in
manslaughter prosecutions. A person
drives his car at an illegal speed. While
thus breaking little law he kills q
pedestrian. He then becomes liable for
big crime, homicide.
A second point greatly strengthens
this one. Under the terms of the NaN
conspiracy, as abundantly shown in the
| evidence, there was to be ruthless sup
| preston of minorities, terrorism and
violence. The detailed carrying out of
these objectives became the response
| bility of the leaders Of the state These
| men were the recognized leaders of Ger
many and the creators of German policy.
| 1t is unnecessary to use broad general
izations to convict such men. The law
and the principles of enforcement are as
clear as they are in any police court in
America.
| The childish defense, so common In
German philosophy, that the violation
Of treaties, the instigation of aggressive
war and all the consequences of such
war are acts of state which is above
and beyond the persons in the state,
is answered correctly by Justice Jackson.
He says, Grimes always are committed
only by persons" If the persons at the
head of the state are not liable, no one
is liable, and we have acts committed
by human beings of which no human
being is guilty. This is wholly unrea-
sonable.
| Finally, the defendants claim that the
| judges and prosecutors in the Nuern-
berg court are not Germans Hence,
that 1t is ex parte. The absurdity of this
is shown by considering what would
happen if the following defense were
made by an American who committed
murder in Mexico? MY judge and
prosecutor are Mexicans. I demand a
trial by Americans" The members of
the Nuremberg court are citizens of the
only effective governments now existing
in Germany. They are all parties to
the conventions which made the laws
| violated in this war. And even if Ger
many were an actual operating state and
had representatives on the court, the
| substantial course of the prosecution
would not be altered. Do these men
expect to be tried only by Germans for
| violating international laws?