dtufail/nuremberg-trials-corpus huggingface dataset:
M. CHARLES DUBOST (Deputy Chief Prosecutor for the French Republic): The population is to be treated as jointly responsible for Individual acts of sabotage, if by its attitude in general towards the German Armed Forces, it has favored hostile or unfriendly acts of individuals, or if by its passive resistance against the investigation of previous acts of sabotage, it has encouraged hostile elements to similar acts, or otherwise created a favorable atmosphere for opposition to the German occupation. All measures must be taken in a way that it is possible to carry out. Threats that cannot be realized give the impression of weakness." I submit these two documents as Exhibit Number RF-268 and 269 (Documents Number F-508 and F-510). Until now we have not found any trace in these German texts of an affirmation which might lead one to think that the taking of hostages and their execution constitute a right for the occupying power; but here is a German text which explicitly formulates this idea. It is quoted in your book of documents as Document Number F-507 (Exhibit Number RF-270), dated Brussels, 18 April 1944. It is issued by the Chief Judge to the military Commander-in-Chief in Belgium and the North of France; and it is addressed to the German Armistice Commission in Wiesbaden. It reads in the margin: "Most Secret. Subject: Execution of 8 terrorists in Lille on 22 December 1943. Reference: Your letter of 16 March 1944 Lille document." You will read in the middle of Paragraph 2 of the text: "...Moreover, I maintain my point of view that the legal foundations for the measures taken by the Oberfeldkommandantur of Lille, by virtue of the letter of my police group of the 2d of March 1944, are, regardless of the opinion of the Armistice Commission, sufficiently justified and further explanations are superfluous. The Armistice Commission is in a position to declare to the French, if it wishes to go into the question in detail at all, that the executions have been carried out in conformity with the general principles of the law concerning hostages." It is, therefore, quite obviously a state doctrine which is involved.
M. CHARLES DUBOST (Deputy Chief Prosecutor for the French Republic): Innocent people become forfeit.. They answer with their lives for the attitude of their fellow-citizens towards the German Army. If an offense is committed of which they are completely ignorant, they are the object of a collective penalty possibly entailing d eath. This is the official German thesis imposed by the German High Command, in spite of the protests of the German Armistice Commission in Wiesbaden. I say: A thesis imposed by the German High Command, and I will produce the evidence. Keitel, on the 16th of September 1941, signed a general order which has already been read and filed by my American colleagues under Document Number 389-PS (Exhibit Number RF-271) and which I shall begin to explain. This order concerns all the occupied territories of the East and the West, as established by the list of addresses which includes all the military commanders of the countries then occupied by Germany: France, Belgium, Norway, Holland, Denmark, eastern territories, Ukraine, Serbia, Salonika, southern Greece, Crete. This order was in effect for the duration of the war. We have a text of 1944 which refers to it. This order of Keitel, Chief of the OKW, is dictated by a violent spirit of anti-Communist repression. It aims at an kinds of repression of the civilian population. This order, which concerns even the commanders whose troops are stationed in the West, points out to them that in all cases in which attacks are made against the German Army: "It is necessary to establish that we are dealing with a mass movement uniformly directed by Moscow to which may also be imputed the, seemingly unimportant sporadic incidents which have occurred in regions which have hitherto remained quiet." Consequently Keitel orders, among other things, that 50 to 100 Communists are to be put to death for each German soldier killed. This is a political conception which we constantly meet in all manifestations of German terrorism. As far as Hitlerite propaganda is concerned, all resistance to Germany is of Communist inspiration, if not in essence Communist.
M. CHARLES DUBOST (Deputy Chief Prosecutor for the French Republic): The Germans thereby hoped to eliminate from among the resistance the nationalists whom they thought hostile to Communism. But the Nazis also pursued another aim: They still hoped above all to divide France and the other conquered countries of the West into two hostile factions and to put one of these factions at their service under the pretext of anti- Communism.
THE PRESIDENT: Would that be a convenient time to break off for 10 minutes? [A recess was taken.]
M. DUBOST: Keitel confirmed this order concerning hostages on 24 September 1941. We submit it as Exhibit Number RF-272, and you will find it in your document book as F-554. I shall read you the first paragraph: "Following instructions by the Fuehrer, the Supreme Command of the Armed Forces issued on 16 September 1941 an order concerning the Communist revolutionary movements in the occupied territories. The order was addressed to the Ministry for Foreign Affairs for the attention of Ambassador Ritter. It also deals with the question of capital punishment in court-martial proceedings. "According to the order, in the future, most stringent measures must be taken in the occupied territories." The choice of hostages is also indicated thus in Document Number 877-PS, which has already been read to you and which is previous to the aggression of Germany against Russia. It is necessary to remind the Tribunal of this document because it shows the premeditation of the German Command and the Nazi Government to divide the occupied countries, to take away from the partisan resistance all its patriotic character, in order to substitute for it a political character which it never had. We submit this document under Exhibit Number RF-273: "In this connection it must be borne in mind that, apart from other adversaries with whom our troops have to contend, there is a particularly dangerous element of the civilian population which is destructive of all order and propagates Jewish Bolshevist philosophy. There is no doubt that, wherever he possibly can, this enemy uses this weapon of disintegration cunningly and :in ambush against the German forces which are fighting and liberating the country." This document is an official document issued by the headquarters of the High Command of the Army. It expresses the general doctrine of all the German Staff.
M. DUBOST: It is Keitel who presides over the formation of this doctrine: He is therefore not only a soldier under the orders of his government; but at the same time that he is a general, he is also a Nazi politician whose acts are those of a war leader and also those of a politician serving the Hitlerite policy. You have proof of it in the document which I have just read to you: A general who is also a politician, in whom both politics and the conduct of war are combined in one single preoccupation. This is not surprising for those who know the German line of thought, which had never separated war and politics. Was it not Clausewitz who said that war was only the continuation of politics by other means? This is doubly important. This constitutes a direct and crushing charge against Keitel; but Keitel is the German General Staff. Now this organization is indicted, and we see by this document that this indictment is justified as the German General Staff dabbled in the criminal policy of the German Cabinet. In the case of France, the general orders of Keitel were adapted by Stuelpnagel in his order of 30 September 1941, better known in France under the name of "hostages code," which repeats and specifies in detail the previous order, namely that of 23 August 1941. This order of 30 September 1941 is of major importance to anyone who wishes to prove under what circumstances French hostages. were shot. This is why I shall be obliged to read large extracts. It defines, in Paragraph 3, the categories of Frenchmen who will be considered as hostages. I shall read this document 1588-PS, which I submit to the Tribunal as Exhibit Number RF-274. Paragraph I concerns the seizure of hostages. I read: "1. On 22 August 1941, 1 issued the following announcement: "'On the morning of 21 August 1941, a member of the German Armed Forces was killed in Paris as a result of a murderous attack. I therefore order that: "'I. All Frenchmen held in custody of whatever kind, by the German authorities or on behalf of German authorities in France, are to be considered as hostages as from 23 August. "T.
M. DUBOST: If any further incident occurs, a number of these hostages are to, be shot, to be determined according to the gravity of the attempt.' "2. On 19 September 1941 by an announcement to the Plenipotentiary of the French Government attached to the Military Commander in France, I ordered that, as from 19 September 1941, all French males who are under arrest of any kind by the French authorities or who are taken into custody because of Communist or anarchistic agitation are to be kept under arrest by the French authorities also on behalf of the Military Commander in France. "3. On the basis of my notification of the 22d of August 1941 and of my order of the 19th of September 1941 the following groups of persons are therefore hostages: "'(a) All Frenchmen who are kept in detention of any kind whatsoever by the German authorities, such as police custody, imprisonment on remand, or penal detention. "(b) All Frenchmen who are kept in detention of any kind whatsoever by the French authority on behalf of the German, authorities. This group includes: "(aa) All Frenchmen who are kept in detention of any kind whatsoever by the French authorities because of Communist or anarchist activities. "(bb) All Frenchmen on whom the French penal authorities impose prison terms at the request of the German military courts and which the latter consider justified. "(cc) All Frenchmen who are arrested and kept in custody by the French authorities upon demand of the German authorities or who are being handed over by the Germans to French authorities with the order to keep them under arrest. "(c) Stateless inhabitants who have already been living for some time in France are to be considered as Frenchmen within the meaning of my notification of the 22d of August 1941' . . "III. Release from detention. "Persons who were not yet in custody on 22 August 1941 or on 19 September 1941 but who were arrested later or are still being arrested are hostages as from the date of detention if the other conditions apply to them.
M. DUBOST: "The release of arrested persons authorized on account of expiration of sentences, lifting of the order for arrest, or for other reasons will not be affected by my announcement of 22 August 1941. Those released are no longer hostages. "In as far as persons are in custody of any kind with the French authorities for Communist or anarchist activity, their release is possible only with my approval as I have informed the French Government.... "VI. Lists of hostages. "If an incident occurs which according to my announcement of 22 August 1941 necessitates the shooting of hostages, the execution must immediately follow the order. The district commanders, therefore, must select for their own districts from the total number of prisoners (hostages es) those who, from a practical point of view, may be considered for execution and enter them on a list of hostages. These lists of hostages serve as a basis for the proposals to be submitted to me in the case of an execution. "I. According to the observations made so far, the perpetrators of outrages originate from Communist or anarchist terror gangs. The district commanders are, therefore, to select from those in detention (hostages), those persons who, because of their Communist or anarchist views in the past or their positions in such organizations or their former attitude in other ways, are most suitable for execution. In making the selection it should be borne in mind that the better known the hostages to be shot, the greater will be the deterrent effect on the perpetrators, themselves, and on those persons who, in France or abroad, bear the moral responsibility--as instigators or by their propaganda-for acts of terror and sabotage. Experience shows that the instigators and the political circles interested in these plots are not concerned about the life of obscure followers, but are more likely to be concerned about the lives of their own former officials.
M. DUBOST: Consequently, we must place at the head of these lists: "(a) Former deputies and officials of Communist or anarchist organizations." Allow me to make a comment, gentlemen. There never were any anarchist organizations represented in parliament, in either of our Chambers; and this paragraph (a) could only refer to former deputies and officials of the Communist organizations, of whom we know, moreover, that some were executed by the Germans as hostages. "(b) Persons (intellectuals) who have supported the spreading of Communist ideas by word of mouth or writing. "(c) Persons who have proved by their attitude that they are particularly dangerous. "(d) Persons who have collaborated in the distribution of leaflets." One idea is dominant in this selection: "We must punish the elite." In conformity with paragraph (b) of this article, we shall see that the Germans shot a great number of intellectuals, including Solomon and Politzer, in 1941 and 1942, in Paris and in the provincial towns. I shall come back to these executions later when I give you examples of German atrocities committed in relation to the policy' of hostages in France. "2. Following the same directives, a list of hostages is to be prepared from the prisoners with De Gaullist sympathies. "3. Racial Germans of French nationality who are imprisoned for Communist or anarchist activity may be included in the list. Special attention must be drawn to their German origin on the attached form. "Persons who have been condemned to death but who have been pardoned may also be included in the lists.... "5. The lists have to record for each district about 150 persons and for the Greater Paris Command about 300 to 400 people. The district chiefs should always record on their lists those persons who had their last residence or permanent domicile in their districts, because the persons to be executed should, as far as possible, be taken from the district where the act was committed.... "The lists are to be kept up to date. Particular attention is to be paid to new arrests and releases.' "VII.
M. DUBOST: Proposals for executions: "In case of an incident which necessitates the shooting of hostages, within the meaning of my announcement of 22 August 1941, the district chief in whose territory the incident. happened is to select from the list of hostages persons whose execution he wishes to propose to me. In making the selection he must, from the personal as well as local point of view, draw from persons belonging to a circle which presumably includes the guilty." I skip a paragraph. "For execution, only those persons who were already under arrest at the time of the crime may be proposed. "The proposal must contain the names and number of the persons proposed for execution, that is, in the order in which the choice is recommended." And, at the very end of Paragraph VIII, we read: "When the bodies are buried, the burial of a large number in a common grave in the same cemetery is to be avoided, in order not to create places of pilgrimage which, now or later, might form centers for anti-German propaganda. Therefore, if necessary, burials must be carried out in various places." Parallel to this document, concerning France, there exists in Belgium an order of Falkenhausen of 19 September 1941, which you will find on Page 6 of the official report on Belgium, Document Number F-683, which I shall submit as Exhibit Number RF-275.
THE PRESIDENT: Is the Belgian document worded in substantially the same terms as the document you have just read?
M. DUBOST: Exactly.
THE PRESIDENT: Then I do not think you need to read that. M. DUBOST: As you wish. Then it will not be necessary either to read in entirety the warning of Seyss-Inquart concerning Holland. I think that by referring to these exhibits in your document book, you will be able to obtain items of evidence which will only confirm what I read to you of Stuelpnagel's order. For Norway and Denmark there is a teletyped letter from Keitel to the Supreme Command of the Navy, dated 30 November 1944, which you will find in the document book, as Document C-48 (Exhibit Number RF-280). I read the end of Paragraph 1: "Every ship-yard worker must know that any act of sabotage occurring within his sphere of activity entails for him personally or for his relatives, if he disappears, the most serious consequences." Page 2 of Document Number 870-PS (Exhibit Number RF-281): "4. 1 have just received a teletype from Field Marshal Keitel requesting the publication of an order according to which the personnel or, if need be, their near relatives (liability of next of kin) will be held collectively responsible for the acts of sabotage occurring in their factories." And Terboven, who wrote this sentence, added (and it is he who condemns Marshal Keitel): "This request only makes sense and will only be successful if I am actually allowed to have executions carried out by shooting." All these documents will be submitted.
THE PRESIDENT: M. Dubost, do I understand that in Belgium, Holland, in Norway, and in Denmark, there were similar orders or decrees with reference to hostages?
M. DUBOST: Yes, Your Honor, I mean to read those concerning Belgium, Holland, and Norway. For Belgium, for instance, you will find at Page 6, Document Number F-683, which is the official document of the Belgian Ministry of, Justice: "Brussels, 29 November 1945, 1, rue de Turin. Decree of Falkenhausen of 19 September 1911. "In the future, the population must expect that if attacks are made on members of the German Army or the German Police and the culprits cannot be arrested, a number of hostages proportionate to the gravity of the offense, five at a minimum, will be shot if the attack causes death. All political prisoners in Belgium are, with immediate effect, to be considered as hostages."
THE PRESIDENT: M. Dubost, I did not want you to read these documents if they are substantially in the same form as the document you have already read.
M. DUBOST: They are more or less in the same form, Your Honor. I shall submit them because they constitute the proof of the systematic repetition of the same methods to obtain the same results, that is, to cause terror to reign in all the occupied countries of the West., But, if the Tribunal considers it constant and established that these methods were systematically used in all the western regions, naturally I shall spare you the reading of documents which are monotonous and which repeat in substance what was said in the document relating to France.
THE PRESIDENT: Perhaps you had better give us references to the documents which concern Belgium, Holland, Norway, and Denmark.,
M. DUBOST: Yes, Your Honor, for Belgium, Document F-683, Page 6, decree of Falkenhausen of 19 September 1941, submitted as Exhibit Number RF-275, as constituting the official report of the Kingdom of Belgium against the principal war criminals. The second document is C-46, -corresponding to UK-42 (24 November 1942), submitted as Exhibit Number RF-276. For Holland, a warning by Seyss-Inquart, Document Number F-224, which you may feel it necessary for me to read, since Seyss- Inquart is one of the defendants. I submit this document under Exhibit Number RF-279, and I quote: "For the destruction or the damaging of railway installations, telephone cables, and post offices I shall make responsible all the inhabitants of the community on whose territory the act is committed. "The population of these communities must expect that reprisals will be taken against private property and that houses or whole blocks will be destroyed."
THE PRESIDENT: I am afraid I don't know where you are reading. Which paragraph are you reading?
M. DUBOST: I am told, Mr. President, that this document has not been bound with the Dutch report; I shall file it at the end of the hearing, if I may.
THE PRESIDENT: Very well,
M. DUBOST: I quote now another document, the warning of Seyss-Inquart to Holland.
THE PRESIDENT: And that is what number?
M. DUBOST: Number 152 in your document book, concerning German justice, which will be submitted at the hearing tomorrow. For Norway and Denmark we have several documents which establish that the same policy of execution of hostages was followed. We have, in particular, Document C-48 (Exhibit Number RF-280) from which I read a short time ago. All those special orders for each of the occupied regions of the West are the result of the general order of Keitel, which my American colleagues have already read and on which I merely gave a comment this morning. The responsibility of Keitel in the development of the policy of execution of hostages is total. He was given warning; German generals even told him that this policy went beyond the aim pursued and might become dangerous. On 16 September 1942, General Falkenhausen addressed a letter to him, from which I extract the following passage-it is Document Number 1594-PS, which I submit as Exhibit Number RF-283: "Enclosed is a list of the shootings of hostages which have taken place until now in my area and the incidents on account of which these shootings took place., "In a great number of cases, particularly in the most serious, the perpetrators were later apprehended and sentenced. "This result is undoubtedly very unsatisfactory. The effect is not so much deterrent as destructive of the feeling of the population for right and security; the cleft between the people influenced by communism and the remainder of the population is being bridged; all circles are becoming filled with a feeling of hatred toward the occupying forces and effective inciting material is given to enemy propaganda. Thereby military danger and general political reaction of an entirely unwanted nature . .
M. DUBOST: .- Signed - "Von Falkenhausen." I shall now present Document Number 1587-PS from the same German general and he seems to be lucid: "In addition I wish once more to point out the following: "In several cases the authors of aggression or acts of sabotage were discovered when the hostages had already been shot, shortly after the criminal acts had been committed, according to the instructions received. Moreover, the real culprits often did not belong to the same circles as the executed hostages. Undoubtedly in such cases the execution of hostages does not inspire terror in the population but indifference to repressive measures and even resentment on the part of some sections of the population who until then had displayed a passive attitude. The result for the occupying power is therefore negative as planned and intended by the English agents, who were often the instigators of these acts. It win therefore be necessary to prolong the delay in cases where the arrest of the culprits may yet be expected. I therefore request that you leave to me the responsibility for fixing such delays, in order that the greatest possible success in the fight against terrorist acts may be obtained."
THE PRESIDENT: Is it known what the date of that document was?