dtufail/nuremberg-trials-corpus huggingface dataset:
M. GERTHOFFER: The promise of rewards for denouncing violations of the rationing regulations, equivalent to a high percentage of the value of the goods seized on account of the denunciation. "4. The hiring of informers and of agents provocateurs. "Further to hinder illegal production: "5. Closing of all enterprises that are not working for the war industry. "6. Closing or merging of enterprises whose capacity or production is being only partly exploited. "7. Closer control of the productivity of factories. "8. Close examination of the quantity of raw materials allotted for the German orders placed in France. "9. A policy of prices which affords the enterprises adequate profit and thus guarantees their means of existence." Examining the demands of the rulers of the occupied countries with relation to the German purchases on the black market, Veltjens writes: "Moreover, lately the French and Belgian economic and government circles, among others the Chief of the French Government himself, have considered it necessary to complain about the organized German buying. In response to remonstrations of this kind, it should be pointed out-in addition to various other arguments-that on the part of the Germans, too, there is naturally the greatest interest in the disappearance of the black market. But the chief responsibility for its existence rests with the government authorities themselves for their incompetence regarding price control and their negligence in meting out just punishment, whereby lack of discipline among their own population is encouraged." The Tribunal will allow me to stress the value of the argument developed by Veltjens by reminding it that the Germans were the principal purchasers on the black market, and that their agents enjoyed absolute immunity. Finally, speaking of the machinery in the factories, Veltjens writes in his report: ,Another order of the delegate for the special missions, concerns seizure of the machinery of closed factories.
M. GERTHOFFER: It is an established fact that great capacities, particularly of machine tools, are not being utilized at present, while at home they are urgently needed for armament production. After an agreement by the delegate of special missions, the military commander, and the plenipotentiary for machine production, there has been created in France, at the armament inspection office, an office for the distribution of machines (Maschinenausgleichstellen). "The creation of Maschinenausgleichstellen in Belgium and Holland is pending. One of the main difficulties, in this field, is to overcome the resistance of the owners of the factories, as well as that of the local government offices of the occupied territories. "The occupation authorities will have to use every means to break this resistance." In conclusion, Veltjens alludes in his report to the Roges company, which was a special organization for the transport to Germany of the booty captured in the occupied countries, and more particularly, of products acquired by operations on the black market. One of the directors of this organization, called Ranis, was interrogated on 1 November 1945, and declared in substance that the Roges company had begun its activity in February 1941, succeeding another organization. On the whole he confirms the facts that are reported in Veltjens' report. I shall therefore simply submit a copy of his interrogation to the Tribunal under Document Number RF- 113. The scope of the operations on the black market is thus established by German documents which cannot be contested by the opposite side. I beg to point out to you that these documents prove that within 5 months, in three countries, these operations amount to the sum of 1,107,792,818 Reichsmark. We shall come back to certain details when examining the special situation of certain countries. However, it is necessary for me to indicate the reasons why the Defendant Goering finally came to decide that the black market operations should be suspended.
M. GERTHOFFER: Indeed, on 15 March 1943, under the pretext of avoiding the risk of inflation in the occupied countries, Goering decided that black market purchases be suspended. We have just seen that the Defendant Goering worried little about the fate of the population of the occupied countries, since he had decided that the black market purchases were to continue even at the risk of inflation. The true reason is the following: While the official German organizations were buying at prices which were strictly fixed by them, the clandestine organizations were accepting much higher prices. The merchandise was therefore always gravitating to the black market, to the detriment of the official market; and clandestine production in the end absorbed the normal production. Finally it must be added that the corruption resulting from such practices in certain circles of the German Armed Forces became disquieting to the German leaders. The black market was therefore suppressed officially on 15 March 1943, but some purchasing bureaus continued their clandestine activities until the time of liberation but on a much smaller scale than before 15 March 1943. I cite a passage of the report of the French Economic Control which I have just put into evidence as Document Number RF-107 and which gives an idea of the disorder that was created by the German actions and which shows the reasons why the Reich authorities officially suspended the black market purchases-Page 21 of the French text: "That was the time when champagne, cognac, and benedictine were handled by lots of 10,000 to 50,000 bottles and pate de foie gras by the ton! From the very beginning the general corruption had affected a great number of the Wehrmacht officers, attracted by the sumptuous life which surrounded them. It penetrated so far into the German military circles that, from the lower mess sergeant up to the superior officer, each one was implicated with the worst traffickers, demanding commissions on all the deals.
M. GERTHOFFER: In a clandestine sale of wool thread the authorities found themselves face to face with a general of the Air Force." Around them soon flocked all the bad elements of France, swindlers and other habitual criminals. Then came a crowd of all the customary trade traffickers, brokers, and out-of-work agents, generally unimportant middlemen. It is understood that in such a circle, composed of unknown and elusive people, the black market deals which were transacted without invoices and in cash, and without written receipts, except those of the German offices, cannot today be easily disclosed and evaluated. I resume the quotation at Page 2 "Originating in the course of the year 1941, the commercial agitation of these Parisian purchasing bureaus continued in this manner for about 20 months. But, after having attained its peak at the end of 1942, this activity came to an abrupt end in March 1943, a victim of its own excesses. "Actually, during the entire occupation production prices were strictly limited by the French authorities and even more so by the German economic services which were systematically opposed to any increase in prices and anxious, above all, to maintain large purchasing power for the French money at "But, since the supplies delivered to the enemy under contract were being paid for at prices hardly better than the legal ones, the clandestine purchasing agencies accepted at the same time rates several times higher for the same products. "So the conveying of merchandise to the German black market increased more and more, while the secret production of goods to be forwarded through these dark channels increased. The disorder became rapidly such that, in certain branches of industry, deliveries according to contract could not be carried out except with great delay, in spite of the menacing protests of the German authorities. "Completely aghast, -the French Ministry of Industrial Production had to inform the German authorities that the national production would soon no longer be able to meet its obligations.
M. GERTHOFFER: "This obvious situation, together with the necessity of putting an end to the incredible corruption brought about by the black market in the Wehrmacht, led the Reich Government, if not totally to suppress the black market, at least to consider closing the Paris purchasing bureaus. "This measure was made effective 13 March 1943 according to an agreement between Bichelonne and General Michel. "However"-and this is very significant---"the German economic services did not fail to ask in compensation for a considerable rise in the quotas fixed under the agreements. Thus for the Kehrl plan alone this rise amounted to 6,000 tons of textiles. "Only a few bureaus were able to carry on their activities until the liberation, either by endeavoring to execute their purchases through Roges (D'Humieres, Economic Union, et cetera), or collaborating with military authorities buying supplies and with the bureaus of the German Air force and the Navy."
THE PRESIDENT: We will adjourn for 10 minutes. [A recess was taken.]
M. GERTHOFFER: In the-course of my explanations I shall come back to the case of each particular country, concerning the black market operations, in order to show their extent. But I think that, just now, it is established by the Veltjens report, as well as by the passages from the French Economic Control report which I had the honor to read to the Tribunal, that the black market was organized by the leaders of the Reich, and especially by the Defendant Goering And to finish the general observations concerning economic plundering, I beg the Tribunal's permission to give a few explanations from the legal point of view. That is the subject of Chapter 5 of this first part. From a legal point of view it is not contestable that organized plundering of the countries invaded by Germany is prohibited by the International Hague Convention, signed by Germany and deliberately violated by her, even though her leaders never failed to invoke this Convention every time they tried to benefit by it. Section III of the Hague Convention, entitled "The Military Authority over the Territories of the Enemy State," relates to economic questions. These clauses are very clear and need not be discussed. If the Tribunal will allow me to recall them in reading, here is Section III of the Hague Convention which I put into* the document book as Document Number RF-114, and which is entitled, "The Military Authority over the Territories of the Enemy State": "Article 42: A territory is considered occupied when it is placed actually under the authority of the hostile army. The occupation extends only to the territories where this authority has been established and can be exercised. "Article 43: The authority of the legitimate power having in fact passed into the hands of the occupant, the latter..."
THE PRESIDENT: I think we can take judicial notice of these articles of the Convention.
M. GERTHOFFER: I shall therefore not read this article, since. the Tribunal knows the Convention, and shall simply limit myself to certain juridical remarks. These texts of the Hague Convention show in a very clear way that the Germans could seize in occupied countries only what was. necessary for the maintenance of troops indispensable in the occupation of the territories. All items which were levied beyond these limits were in violation of the texts which you know, and consequently these acts were acts of plundering. Counsel for the Defense may contend that all these prescriptions must be put aside, because Germany had set herself the goal of continuing the war against Britain, the U.S.S.R., and the United States of America. The Defense may claim that, because of this, Germany was in a state of need and had to counter the prescriptions of the Hague Convention, trying to interpret the Article 23 G as. allowing destruction or seizure even of private property. I shall immediately answer that this text does not lay down. rules relating to the conduct of the occupant in enemy territory. These last prescriptions are contained, I repeat, in Articles 42 to 56, but they referred to the conduct which the belligerents must observe in the course of the combat. The words "to seize" in the sentence . . to seize enemy property except in cases where... these seizures are absolutely demanded by military necessity," mean-and there can be no discussion as to, translation because actually the French text is binding-the words "to seize" mean not to appropriate a thing, but to put it under the protection of the law with a view to leaving it unused, in the state in which it was found, and keeping it for its true owner or for whoever can show right to it. Such a seizure permits the military authority, as long as the action lasts, to prevent the owner from using the property against its troops, but it does not authorize the military authority in any case to appropriate it for itself.
M. GERTHOFFER: Acts of economic plunder are all contrary to the principles of international law and furthermore are formally provided for by Article 6b of the Charter of the International Military Tribunal of August 1945. These constant violations of the Hague Contention had the result of enriching Germany and permitted her to continue the war against Britain, the Soviet Union, and the United States, while they ruined the invaded countries, the populations of which, subjected to a regime of slow famine, are now physically weakened and, but for the victory of the Allies, would be on the road to progressive extermination. These inhuman deeds therefore constitute War Crimes which come within the competency of the International Military Tribunal as far as the leaders of the Reich are concerned. Before finishing this rapid summary of juridical questions, the Tribunal will permit me to refute in advance an argument which will certainly be presented by the Defense, especially as far as economic plunder is concerned. They will claim that your high jurisdiction did not exist, that international penal law had not yet been formulated in any text when the defendants perpetrated the acts with which they are at present charged, and that therefore they could not be condemned to any sentence whatsoever by virtue of the principle of non-retroactivity of penal laws. Why, Gentlemen, is this principle adopted by modem legislation? It is indisputable that any person who is conscious of never having violated any legal prescription could not be condemned because of acts which were committed in such circumstances. For example, somebody issues a check without funds to cover it, before his country had adopted a penalty for such an offense. But the case which is submitted to you is quite different. The defendants cannot maintain that they were not conscious of having violated legislation of any kind.
M. GERTHOFFER: First of all, they violated international conventions: The Hague Convention of 1907, the Kellogg- Briand Pact of 27 August 1938, and then they violated all the penal laws of the invaded countries. How, in these proceedings, shall economic plunder be qualified? Theft, swindling, blackmail, and even, I will add, murder-since, in order to attain their aims, the Germans have premeditated and committed numerous murders which enabled them to intimidate the population in order to plunder them better. From the point of view of domestic law, these deeds certainly fall under the application of Articles 295 and the following ones of the French penal code, and especially of Article 303, which stipulates as guilty of murder all offenders, of whatever category, who, to execute their crimes, resort to torture or perpetrate barbarous acts. I will add that the defendants violated even the German criminal code, in particular under Articles 249 and following. Counsel for the Defense will certainly stress that some leaders of the invaded countries were in agreement with the Reich Government as to the economic collaboration, and that consequently the Reich Government cannot be charged with acts which derive from these agreements. Such arguments must be refuted: 1.) If, in all the invaded countries, patriots resisted with more or less courage, it is true that some of them, out of inertia, fear, or self interest, turned traitors to their country. They have been or will be condemned. But the crimes committed by certain of them cannot be exonerating or even extenuating circumstances in favor of the defendants, especially since the latter had very often put these traitors in to manage the occupied countries. The fact of having brought individuals to turn traitor to their country only aggravates, on the contrary, the heavy charges against the defendants. 2.) These so-called agreements had all been obtained by pressure or by threat.
M. GERTHOFFER: The concluded contracts show that they were solely in favor of Germany, who, as a matter of fact, never brought any compensation or illusory benefits-very often their burdensome nature is seen from the mere reading of such contracts, as I will have the honor to show in certain particular cases. With these explanations my general observations on the economic pillage are concluded, and if the Tribunal is willing we can examine the particular case of Denmark. When the Germans invaded Denmark, contrary to all the prescriptions of the law of nations and to their engagements, they were not certain of rapidly dominating Western Europe. At first 'they laid down the principle that they would not take anything in the country, but after their success of May 1940 their attitude changed; and little by little they treated Denmark more or less like the other occupied countries. Nevertheless, they sought to achieve annexation pure and simple, and took rigorous measures against the population only in the cour se of 1942, when they saw that they would not be able to win Denmark over. From the -economic point of view, and to assure their domination, they tried to have at their disposal the majority of the Danish means of payment, and they used to this effect two methods which to a great extent were used by them in other countries: (1) The levying of a veritable tribute of war, under the pretext of maintaining their army of occupation; (2) the functioning of the so-called clearing agreement to their almost exclusive benefit. These two methods should be studied in Chapter I of this statement. Chapter I, German seizure of the means of payment; costs of occupation. Article 49 of the Hague Convention stipulates that if the occupant levies a tax the money will only be for the army of occupation or for the administration of the territory. The occupant can therefore levy a tax for the maintenance of its army, but this tax must not exceed the sum strictly necessary.
M. GERTHOFFER: The needs of the army of occupation mean, not the costs of armament and equipment, but only the costs of billeting, food, and pay. I say normal expenses, which exclude luxuries. Article 52 authorizes the occupying power to exact from the communes or inhabitants, for the needs of the army, requisitions in kind and services, with the express condition that they should be proportionate with the resources of the country and of such a nature that they should not imply for the population the obligation to take part in operations against their own country. The same Article 52 stipulates that levies in kind shall be paid as far as possible in cash; otherwise they are to be confirmed by receipts and the sums due paid as soon as possible. In other words, the Hague Convention allows the occupying army to requisition in occupied territories what is necessary for the maintenance of the troops but under two conditions, apart from contributions in kind: 1) That the requisitions and the services should be proportionate to the resources of the country, that is to say, that sufficient should be left over for the inhabitants, to enable them at least to live; 2) that the levies should be paid as soon as possible. This is not a question of fictitious payment made with funds extorted from occupied countries, but actual payment, which implies supplying real equivalents. Article 53 of the Convention of The Hague which permits the occupying powers to seize everything which could be turned against them-and in particular, cash, funds, and securities of all kinds belonging to the state of the occupied country--does not authorize the occupying power to appropriate them. According to information furnished by the Danish Government, when the Germans entered Denmark they declared that they would not demand anything from the country, but that supplies for the German Army would come from the Reich.
M. GERTHOFFER: Nevertheless, instead of buying Danish crowns to permit their troops to spend money in Denmark, as early as 9 May 1940 they imposed the circulation of notes of the Reichskreditkasse, which is shown in Number 26 of the VOBIF, which I have already submitted under Document Number RF-93. Upon the protestations of the National Danish Bank against the issuing of foreign paper money, the Germans withdrew these notes from circulation, but demanded the opening of an account at the National Bank, promising to draw upon it only for sums which were essential for the maintenance of their army in Denmark. But the Germans did not lose time in violating their promises and in levying on their account, in spite of the Danish protests, sums infinitely superior to the needs of the army of occupation. According to the information given by the Danish Government, the Germans levied, per month, an average of 43 million crowns in 1940; 37 million crowns in 1941; 39 million crowns in 1942; 83 million crowns in 1943; 157 million crowns in 1944; 187 million crowns in 1945. The total of these levies amounts, according to the Danish Government, to 4,830 million crowns. I submit, as Document Number RF-115, the financial report of the Danish Government concerning this, a report to which I shall refer again in the course of this statement. The indications of the Danish Government are corroborated by a German document discovered by the United States Army, Document EC-86, Page 11, which I submit to the Tribunal as Exhibit Number RF-116. This is a secret report of 10 October 1944, written by the Arbeitsstab Ausland, and concerns the requisition of funds of the occupied territories. On Page 11 the following is said: "Denmark is not considered as occupied territory, and therefore does not pay occupation expenses. The means necessary for the German troops are placed at the disposal of the central administration of the Reichskreditkasse by the Central Danish Bank, through channels of ordinary credit.