dtufail/nuremberg-trials-corpus huggingface dataset:
are not. The simpler form I like better. Will you forgive me if I leave? I must go and learn my fate at the polls. Sir Thomas will carry on. SIR THOMAS BARNES. Do you attach great importance to those words? MR. JUSTICE JACKSON. I don't attach great importance, and it has no more meaning to us than it has to anyone else. GENERAL NIKITCHENKO. It has no real importance. It is hardly likely we could settle this on the spot. Perhaps, if Mr. Justice Jackson would find it possible to put his suggestion in ' writing as to alterations of this text, it could be taken as a basis for discussion. SIR THOMAS BARNFS. Would the best thing be for us of the drafting committee to prepare a document now along the lines of the compromise which we have suggested? In collaboration with our colleagues we shall consider documents which were circulated some time ago. In redrafting we shall bear in mind the discussion which has taken place this afternoon. We shall circulate that, and you can consider it. GENERAL NIKITCHENKO. We cannot recommend that. We are afraid that, if the text turns out to be too new, we would go back to where we were before. SIR THOMAS BARNES. We shall do our best to maintain our whole text as we have in this discussion. We have taken the compromise from both. We hope it won't be too far away. Well then, does Mr. Justice Jackson object to the last paragraph of the Soviet draft-the question of responsibility? MR. JUSTICE JACKSON. No, not if the common plan is clear. SIR THOMAS BARNES. The whole purpose of this, as I understand it, is to place personal responsibility on the major war criminals for all the criminal acts which have been committed by the armed forces, civilians, and otherwise, and I thought it a useful thing to put in. Whether we have got to the actual phraseology I do not know. Then we agree that that or something of that sort goes in. Then we come to the definition of aggression, which is a rather difficult one. What do you feel about it? MR. TROYANOVSKY. The last draft of the Americans on definition of aggression- SIR THOMAS BARNES. Shall we put the last American draft defining aggression into the new draft for consideration? I should like myself to put it in and so would the Attorney-General.
one. What do you feel about it? MR. TROYANOVSKY. The last draft of the Americans on definition of aggression- SIR THOMAS BARNES. Shall we put the last American draft defining aggression into the new draft for consideration? I should like myself to put it in and so would the Attorney-General. GENERAL NIKITCHENKO. We have already bad occasion to state our opinion, and we still think that it is outside of the competence of this committee and that it would not be any help at the trial. JUDGE FALCO. I think it is also outside of consideration. I thought we agreed to take that proposed by the Soviet Delegation. If we take a new point, I am afraid we would be delayed. GENERAL NIKITCHENKO. If we start discussion on that again, I am afraid the war criminals would die of old age. SIR THOMAS BARNES. What would you like to do about that, Mr. Justice Jackson? Would you like to reconsider it? MR. JUSTICE JACKSON. As I have said before, the thing concerns chiefly the European powers. I think nothing would be more unfortunate in relations with the United States than for us to get into the causes of war, and the risks are not mine but yours. I will not commit the United States to litigating the causes of the war. Maybe you will have judges who without such provision would rule such matter out, but, if I were sitting and you objected to their political or economic justification, I would say you were drawing the agreement. If you thought it an illegal defense, why did you not say so? GENERAL NIKITCHENKO. The judges perhaps would be experienced enough to consider that as irrelevant. Sin THOMAS BARNES. This may put into the minds of the defense some arguments which otherwise would not occur to them. GENERAL NIKITCHENKO. Yes, the defendants might very well make use of that paragraph by saying that they were acting in legitimate self-defense. MR. JUSTICE JACKSON. That has been their position for a long time in propaganda in my country, and I don't think it will suggest anything to them that is new. SIR THOMAS BARNES. Well, shall we have a redraft? We will go ahead and see what we can do. The Conference adjourned until July 27, 1945.(1) (1) Because of Mr. Justice Jackson's absence In Potsdam and the change in the British
in my country, and I don't think it will suggest anything to them that is new. SIR THOMAS BARNES. Well, shall we have a redraft? We will go ahead and see what we can do. The Conference adjourned until July 27, 1945.(1) (1) Because of Mr. Justice Jackson's absence In Potsdam and the change in the British Government, the Conference did not reconvene until Aug. 2, 1945. Source: International Conference on Military Trials : London, 1945 Report of Robert H. Jackson, United States Representative to the International Conference on Military Trials : London, 1945 International organization and conference series; II European and British Commonwealth 1 Department of State Publication 3080 Washington, DC : Government Printing Office, 1949
International Conference on Military Trials : London, 1945
Revised Definition of "Crimes", Prepared by British Delegation and Accepted by French Delegation, July 28, 1945
Previous Document
Contents
Next Document
Note: On July 26, 1945, Mr. justice Jackson flew to Potsdam, where a conference of heads of state was in session, for consultation with Secretary of State Byrnes concerning the progress and prospects of the London Conference and its relation to questions that had arisen at Potsdam. While he was at Potsdam, the results of the British elections were announced. The Churchill government, in which Sir David Maxwell Fyfe was Attorney-General, was superseded. This foreshadowed changes in the British representation at the London Conference. Upon his return to London on July 28, 1945, Mr. justice Jackson resumed informal conferences with Sir Thomas Barnes, Treasury-Solicitor, whose position would not be affected by the change of government. Sir Thomas delivered the following revised definition of "crimes", prepared by him, with the explanation that he had obtained French acceptance of it but that the Soviet Delegation had rejected it. The definition was as follows:
26th July, 1945.
4 p. m.
For the purpose of the trials before the Tribunal established by the Agreement referred to in Article 1 hereof, the following acts or designs or attempts at any of them shall be deemed to be crimes coming within the jurisdiction of the Tribunal:
(a) Violations of the laws, rules and customs of war. Such violations shall include but shall not be limited to murder and ill-treatment of prisoners of war, atrocities against civilian populations of occupied countries and the deportation of such populations to slave labour, wanton destruction of towns and villages, and plunder.
of the laws, rules and customs of war. Such violations shall include but shall not be limited to murder and ill-treatment of prisoners of war, atrocities against civilian populations of occupied countries and the deportation of such populations to slave labour, wanton destruction of towns and villages, and plunder.
(b) Atrocities against civilian populations other than those referred to in paragraph (a). These include but are not limited to murder and ill-treatment of civilians and deportations of civilians to slave labour and persecution on political, racial or religious grounds committed in pursuance of the common plan or conspiracy referred to in paragraph (d) below.
(c) Initiation of war of aggression against other nations, or initiation of war in violation of treaties, agreements or assurances or otherwise in violation of international law.
(d) Entering into a common plan or conspiracy aimed at domination over other nations, which plan or conspiracy involved or was reasonably likely to involve in its execution all or any of the above crimes.
Any person who is proved to have in any capacity directed or participated in the initiation of war or in the said plan or conspiracy referred to in paragraphs (c) and (d) hereof shall be personally answerable for each and every violation or atrocity referred to in paragraphs (a) or (b) above committed in furtherance of such war as aforesaid, or in pursuance of the said plan or conspiracy.
Source:
International Conference on Military Trials : London, 1945
Report of Robert H. Jackson, United States Representative to the International Conference on Military Trials : London, 1945
International organization and conference series; II
European and British Commonwealth 1
Department of State Publication 3080
Washington, DC : Government Printing Office, 1949
International Conference on Military Trials : London, 1945
Revised Definition of "Crimes", Prepared by British Delegation To Meet Views of Soviet Delegation, July 28, 1945
Previous Document
Contents
Next Document
Note: On July 28, 1945, Sir Thomas Barnes delivered to justice Jackson a further redraft which he had prepared in an endeavor to meet the Soviet views. He explained that the Soviet Delegation had agreed to this definition and had insisted on this form. The document follows:
27th July, 1945.
12: 15 p. in.
For the purpose of the trials of the major war criminals of the European Axis Powers before the Tribunal established by the Agreement referred to in Article I hereof, the following acts or designs or attempts at any of them shall be deemed to be crimes coming within the jurisdiction of the Tribunal:
(a) Initiation of a war of aggression or participating in the waging of war or preparing for war in violation of treaties, agreements or assurances or participating in a common plan or conspiracy aimed at the domination of one nation over other nations and carried out by the European Axis Powers.
(b) Violations of the laws, rules and customs of war. Such violations shall include murder and ill-treatment of prisoners of war, atrocities against civilian populations of occupied countries and the deportation of such populations to slave labour, wanton destruction of towns and villages, and plunder.
(c) Atrocities against civilian populations other than those referred to in paragraph (b). These include murder and ill-treatment of civilians and deportations of civilians to slave labour and persecution on political, racial or religious grounds committed in pursuance of the common plan or conspiracy referred to in paragraph (a) above.
populations other than those referred to in paragraph (b). These include murder and ill-treatment of civilians and deportations of civilians to slave labour and persecution on political, racial or religious grounds committed in pursuance of the common plan or conspiracy referred to in paragraph (a) above.
Any person who is proved to have in any capacity directed or participated in the war or in the plan or conspiracy referred to in paragraph (a) above shall be personally answerable for each and every violation or atrocity referred to in paragraphs (b) or (c) above committed in furtherance of such war, or in pursuance of such plan or conspiracy, by the forces and authorities, whether armed, civilian or otherwise, in the service of any of the European Axis Powers.
Source:
International Conference on Military Trials : London, 1945
Report of Robert H. Jackson, United States Representative to the International Conference on Military Trials : London, 1945
International organization and conference series; II
European and British Commonwealth 1
Department of State Publication 3080
Washington, DC : Government Printing Office, 1949
International Conference on Military Trials : London, 1945
Revised Definition of "Crimes", Submitted by American Delegation, July 30, 1945
Previous Document
Contents
Next Document
The Tribunal established by the Agreement referred to in Article I hereof shall have power and jurisdiction to hear, try and determine charges of crime against only those who acted in aid of the European Axis Powers.
The following acts, designs, or attempts at any of them, shall be deemed to be crimes coming within its jurisdiction:
(a) Initiation of a war of aggression; or initiation of a war in violation of treaties, agreements or assurances, or otherwise in violation of International Law; or participating in a common plan or conspiracy aimed at the domination of one nation over other nations to be carried out by means of any such war.
(b) Violations of the laws, rules or customs of war. Such violations shall include but are not limited to murder and ill-treatment of prisoners of war; atrocities against civilian populations of occupied countries; the deportation of such populations to slave labour; wanton destruction of towns and villages; and plunder or spoliation.
(c) Atrocities against civilian populations other than those referred to in paragraph (b). These include but are not limited to murder and ill-treatment of civilians and deportations of civilians to slave labour or persecution on political, racial or religious grounds committed in any country, at any time, in pursuance of the common plan or conspiracy referred to in paragraph (a) above.
Any person who is proved to have in any capacity directed or participated in the plan or conspiracy referred to in paragraph (a) above shall be personally answerable for each and every violation or atrocity referred to in paragraphs (b) or (c) above committed in furtherance of such plan or conspiracy, by forces and authorities, whether armed, civilian or otherwise.
Source:
International Conference on Military Trials : London, 1945
(a) above shall be personally answerable for each and every violation or atrocity referred to in paragraphs (b) or (c) above committed in furtherance of such plan or conspiracy, by forces and authorities, whether armed, civilian or otherwise. Source: International Conference on Military Trials : London, 1945
Report of Robert H. Jackson, United States Representative to the International Conference on Military Trials : London, 1945
International organization and conference series; II
European and British Commonwealth 1
Department of State Publication 3080
Washington, DC : Government Printing Office, 1949
International Conference on Military Trials : London, 1945
Notes on Proposed Definition of "Crimes", Submitted by American Delegation, July 31, 1945
Previous Document
Contents
Next Document
1. The jurisdiction of this Tribunal, of course, is limited to trial of those of the European Axis Powers. The definition of a crime cannot, however, be made to depend on which nation commits, the act. I am not willing to charge as a crime against a German official acts which would not be crimes if committed by officials of the United States. I think no one will respect any conviction that rests on such a legal foundation. The draft attached suggests changes which would meet those objections.
2. In (a) "participating in the waging of the war" makes one guilty of the crime. This would make the entire soldiery, conscript and volunteer, and numerous civilians guilty. It comes close to making the entire German people guilty by definition. As I have explained, the guilt we should reach is not that of numberless little people of no consequence or influence, but of those who planned and whipped up the war. I suggest words which would accomplish this change.
3. Both (b) and (c) begin with general statements and go on to more specific items. It should be made clear that these specific statements do not limit the general ones. Destruction, as well as plunder, should be specified or we fail to reach such conduct as opening dykes to flood lands with salt water, etc.
4. In (e) we should insert words to make clear that we are reaching persecution, etc. of Jews and others in Germany as well as outside of it, and before as well as after commencement of the war.
should be specified or we fail to reach such conduct as opening dykes to flood lands with salt water, etc. 4. In (e) we should insert words to make clear that we are reaching persecution, etc. of Jews and others in Germany as well as outside of it, and before as well as after commencement of the war.
5. The objection of Note 1 applies to "participated in the war" in the last paragraph in that as it stands at present it seems to render the entire draft meaningless. It may be interpreted as meaning that a person guilty under (a) shall not be answerable unless he is also guilty under (b) and (c), and that a person guilty of crimes under (b) and (c) shall not be answerable unless the crimes are committed in connection with the planning or the initiation of aggressive war. This, of course, would largely render all three paragraphs futile.
I attach a draft intended to overcome what we regard as defects. Respectfully submitted,
ROBERT H. JACKSON
Source:
International Conference on Military Trials : London, 1945
Report of Robert H. Jackson, United States Representative to the International Conference on Military Trials : London, 1945
International organization and conference series; II
European and British Commonwealth 1
Department of State Publication 3080
Washington, DC : Government Printing Office, 1949
International Conference on Military Trials : London, 1945
Revision of Definition of "Crimes", Submitted by American Delegation, July 31, 1945
Previous Document
Contents
Next Document
ARTICLE 6. DEFINITI0N OF CRIMES
The Tribunal established by the Agreement referred to in Article 1 hereof shall have power and jurisdiction to try and determine charges of crime against individuals who and organizations which acted in aid of the European Axis Powers and to impose punishments on those found guilty.
The following acts, or any of them, are crimes coming within its jurisdiction for which there shall be individual responsibility:
(a) THE CRIME or WAR, namely, planning, preparation, initiation or waging of a war of aggression or a war in violation of any international treaty, agreement, or assurance, or in particular, of the General Treaty for the Renunciation of War, or participation in. a common plan or conspiracy for the accomplishment of any of the foregoing;
(b) WAR CRIMES, namely, violations of the laws or customs of war. Such violations shall include, but not be limited to, murder, ill-treatment or deportation of civilian population of or in occupied territory; murder or ill-treatment of prisoners of war or persons on the seas; killing of hostages; sinking of merchant vessels in disregard of international law - attack upon hospital ships; plunder of public or private property; wanton destruction of cities, towns or villages; devastation not justified by military necessity.
(C) CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY, namely, murder extermination, enslavement, deportation, and other inhumane acts committed against any civilian population, before or during the war, or persecutions on political, racial, religious grounds, in furtherance of or in connection With any crime within the jurisdiction of the International Tribunal, whether or not in violation of the domestic law of the country where perpetrated.
against any civilian population, before or during the war, or persecutions on political, racial, religious grounds, in furtherance of or in connection With any crime within the jurisdiction of the International Tribunal, whether or not in violation of the domestic law of the country where perpetrated.
Leaders, organizers, instigators and accomplices participating in the formulation or execution of a common plan or conspiracy to commit any of the foregoing crimes are responsible for all acts performed by any persons in furtherance of such plan.
International law shall include treaties, agreements, and assurances between nations, and the principles of the law of nations, as they result from the usages established among civilized peoples, from the laws of humanity, and from the dictates of the public conscience.
Source:
International Conference on Military Trials : London, 1945
Report of Robert H. Jackson, United States Representative to the International Conference on Military Trials : London, 1945
International organization and conference series; II
European and British Commonwealth 1
Department of State Publication 3080
Washington, DC : Government Printing Office, 1949
International Conference on Military Trials : London, 1945
Memorandum on Changes in Subcommittee Draft Desired by American Delegation, July 31, 1945
Previous Document
Contents
Next Document
MEMORANDUM OF SUGGESTIONS BY THE UNITED STATES OF ALTERATIONS IN THE DRAFT OF AGREEMENT AND CHARTER
SUBMITTED BY THE SUBCOMMITTEE
July 31, 1945
Article 4 of the Agreement as reported reads: "Nothing in the Agreement shall prejudice or release the obligations of the parties to the
Moscow Declaration
for the return of persons to be tried at the scenes of their crimes." The Moscow Declaration was not a legal document but was a broad statement of policy by the representatives of three nations. It did not, in my opinion, create legal obligations. 1 would not feel free, in the legal instrument now before us, to recognize as legal "obligations", in favor of unnamed obligees, this statement of policy. Of course, nothing that we do here should affect the Declaration. I would not object to the inclusion of the following or equivalent language: "Nothing in this Agreement shall affect the policy stated in the Moscow Declaration concerning the return of persons to be tried at the scenes of their crimes."
Article 7 provides that the Agreement for joint trials shall remain in force for a period of one year. Nothing in the Agreement releases the ready parties if one or more of them fails to appoint prosecutors or members of the Tribunal, or otherwise to take steps without which the Agreement could not function. I propose that a provision authorize withdrawal if any Signatory to the Agreement fails promptly to perform the undertakings of it.
Article 15 (1) of the Charter, in the last paragraph, we would like amended to read, "Provided that if there is an equal division of vote concerning the designation of the defendant to be tried by the Tribunal or the charges to be made that proposal will be adopted which was made by the party which proposed that the particular defendant be tried."
we would like amended to read, "Provided that if there is an equal division of vote concerning the designation of the defendant to be tried by the Tribunal or the charges to be made that proposal will be adopted which was made by the party which proposed that the particular defendant be tried."
Article 16 of the Charter should allow the defendant to cross examine any witness called by the prosecution, and he should have the right on the trial as well as on the preliminary examination to make any explanation "relevant to the charges made against him."
Article 17 (e). We support the draft suggested by the Secretary.
Article 22. The place of the first trial should be settled in accordance with previous discussions.
Article 24 makes no provision as to when the prosecution shall offer its evidence, or the defendant its evidence, or the prosecution shall offer rebuttal evidence. This omission may be taken to mean that no evidence is to be offered on the trial and appropriate additions should be made.
Article 26. The language is not clear to me and probably should read that the judgment shall be accompanied by the reasons supporting its findings.
These matters are in addition to the settlement of definition of the crimes to be adopted in Article 6.