Evening star., 1961-04-23

EIcnmann tTlaI. A partial text,
including the main points of his
argument, is given here.
~~-~
/. There is no international
court with criminal jurisdiction
which could have tried Eichmann,
though for the last ten years Is
rael has been among those who
have advocated within the United
Nations the establishment of such
an international criminal court.
2. 1t would have been impossible
at present to establish an ad hoe
international tribunal to try Eich-
mann, in view of the cold war.
3. Neither Germany nor any
other country asked for or ap-
peared to be interested in obtain
ing jurisdiction to try Eichmann.
4. Israel has Jurisdiction in the
Eichmann case because. under
principles Of international law.
where crimes against humanit%
are alleged, physical custody of
the accused by any country is
sufficient to bestow Jurisdiction
upon that country. Also, in such
cases, jurisdiction resides where
evidence and witnesses are easily
available. Another principle con-
fers jurisdiction upon the nation
whose citizens were the victims
of the crimes.
S. The fact that the crimes with
which Eichmann is charged were
committed before Israel was a
state in no way affects her juris-
diction. Israel is the successor OF
the British inundated territory Of
Palestine, and the laws under
which Eichmann is being tried are
not new. These laws adopt in
almost verbatim language the
principles established for the
Nuremberg international tribunal
and unanimously approved by the
United Nations General Assembly.
Nor can one argue that Eichmann
did not know that murder was a
crime when he allegedly COM
mitted his crimes.
Method Of Seizure
6. The manner in which Eich-
mann was brought to Israel in no
way affects the right Of Israe's
court to try him. The United
States Supreme Court in several
cases, and the highest courts Of
other countries, have held that
the right to try is not affected by
the manner in which the accused
is brought into the courtroom.
7. AS to the propriety of taking
Eichmann from Argentina to Is
rael without eXtradition proceed
ing, there is the legal issue and the
moral issue. So far as the legal
issue is concerned, Argentina
brought its complaint to the
United Nations Security Council.
The United Nations by resolution
rebuked Israel for the manner of
Eichmann's capture, but recog-
nized the necessity of having him
brought to trial. The U. N. di-
rected Israel to apologize to Ar
gentina for the incident. Israel
complied, friendly relations be-
tween the two nations we're re-
sumed, and the legal issue is now
a closed matter. To the moral
issue I wish to return later.
8. 1t is misleading to state that
Israel" is trying the defendant.
The fact is that Eichmann is being
tried by an officially and legally
constituted court of law, which is
part Of a judiciary that is COM
pletely and jealousy independent
of the executive and legislative
branches Of that country's gov
ernment. Israels courts have es-
tablished and maintained a repu-
tation for high competence and
fairness.
9. Whether Eichmann will get
a fair trial remains to be seen,
and no one has any right to pre-
judge this issue. 1t may be noted
that both West Germany's Chan
cellor, Konrad Adenauer, and
Eichmann's defense attorney stat
ed publicly before the trial that
Eichmann would be tried fairly.
So far nothing that has happened
since the beginning of the trial
justifies any different view.
Now reflect with me on the
more basic. moral considerations