dtufail/nuremberg-trials-corpus huggingface dataset:
MR. DODD: If your Honors please, I have just one question. BY MR. DODD: Q. A few days ago, on the morning of the 3rd of April, when you were on direct examination, we understood you to say that you had the feeling that you must accept responsibility for orders issued in your name, orders which you passed on, which were issued by Hitler; and on Friday afternoon, when Sir David was examining you, we understood you to say that as an old professional soldier you, of course, understood the traditions and indeed the principles of that profession of obliging a soldier to not carry out any order which he recognizes to be criminal in character. Is that understanding on our part correct? A. Yes, I understood. Q. So that is it fair to say to you that under the obligations of your oath as a professional soldier, you did acknowledge carrying out criminal orders? A. In that way you can hardly say that. What should be said is that the leaders of the state and the authority they held at the time, represented the legislative authority which meant that the executive officers were not under 
     the impression that they were carrying out illegal orders, if they came from the person who was by law entitled to give these orders. Knowledge that acts were committed which were not strictly legal did, of course, exist as far as I am concerned. Q     I understand you to say you did with knowledge carry out and pass on criminal or illegal orders. Is that a fair statement? A In that case may I repeat that my inner conviction was not necessarily that I was being criminal, since after all it had been the head of the state, who as far as we were concerned, was the legislative powere in the country. Consequently I was not convinced that I was acting criminally. Q Well,  I do not want to devote any more time to you except to say this, to suggest to you, that I think your answer is not responsive. You told us that some of these orders were violations of the existing international law. An order issued in that form and on that basis is a criminal order, is an illegal order, is it not?
MR. DODD: A Yes, that is correct. Q Well, when you carried them out you were carrying out criminal orders in v iolation of one of the basic principles of your professional soldier's code no matter by whomthey were issued. A Yes.
THE PRESIDENT: Dr. Nelte, do you sih to re-examine?
DR. NELTE: Mr. President, I do not propose to put any further questions regarding the facts to the witness. It appears to mo that after his frank statements which he has made the facts objectively seen have been clarified to such an extent as can be possible during this tried. Regarding the facts subjectively seen, it is in my conception necessary, however, and particularly with reference to the last question which has been asked by the American Prosecutor, that certain supplementary statements be obtained. RE-DIRECT EXAMINATION BY DR. NELTE: Q Once more, therefore, I am having the Canaris document shown to you, USSR 356, from which General Rudenko has presented to you a handwritten document and also the documents submitted by the British Prosecutor, D-762-I beg your pardon, 766,765, and 770. I am having them shown to you once more. According to statements made during the cross-examination your explanation regarding responsibilities appears to require a supplementary statement. You have said that Hitler's orders and with your cognizance of their contents, 
     were being passed on by you. And now I refer to Mr.Dodd's question and I ask you for your own personal judgment. I must ask you this additional question since it is of the greatest importance. How was it possible and how do you want to explain that these rigorous orders, which were violations of international law, that these orders could be carried out by you or how is it possible, as it says in the Canaris document, that you covered them? You did have objections, you told us so. This is a matter that can only be clarified by you yourself since it is an inner event and it cannot be clarified with the help of documents, as such. Repeatedly you have told me and you emphasized it here that you had the wish to assist in clarifying the absolutely true state of affairs, Thus, I am asking you how was it possible and how do you wish to explain that these orders and instructions were made effective and passed on by you and how is it that no effective resistance was put up?
DR. NELTE: A On the basis of that statement, this discussion, I must say that I understand that some orders or some notes or documents of this kind have been found, in other words, that they were signed by me and that they were passed on in the shape of orders and that I understand how third persons, persons who were not concerned, particularly foreigners, cannot understand it. So as to find an explanation, I must say that you have to know the Fuehrer, that you must know in what circumstances, in what atmosphere day and night I worked in for years. You must not fail to consider just what the circumstances were under which these events occurred. I have repeatedly stated here and I had done what I have said, namely, stated my objections. I have raised them. The Fuehrer would then advance arguments which to him appeared decisive and he did it in a rather forceful way, which was peculiar to him, stating the military and political necessities and his concern for the welfare of his soldiers and their safety and his worries regarding the future of our people. I must state because of that but also because of the ever increasing emergency in which we found ourselves, I realized the necessity and the rightness of such measures and I often allowed myself to become convinced. Thus I would transmit the orders that were given, I 
     promulgated them without being in any way deterred by any possible effects they might have. You may consider this weakness and you may consider that I am guilty but at any rate, the facts as I have described them did exist. During the examination by Sir David I myself admitted that I often had serious conflicts of conscience and that I often found myself in a position where I myself had to draw the consequences of those matters. But one thing I had not thought of and that was that I should in any way act against the head of the state and the supreme commander of the armed forces or refuse to obey him. As far as I am concerned, and as a soldier, this is a conception which cannot be violated.
DR. NELTE: I may have made mistakes, I may have acted in error and perhaps I can be accused of having been weak under the Fuehrer, Adolf Hitler, but one thing you cannot accuse me of, and that is I was cowardly, that I was not honorable and that I was faithless. That is all I have to say to your question.
DR. NELTE: Mr President, I have reached the end of my examination. I should only like to ask you, if I may, that the documents which have been offered to the Tribunal in the course of this examination, bearing the numbers one and two in document book two, named documents K-8 and K-9, be admitted in evidence without the necessity of my reading any pants thereof. The Prosecution knows, the documents and they are agreeable. BY THE PRESIDENT: Q Defendant, there is one question I should like to ask you. Are you suggesting that you ever put your protest or objections to the orders of Hitler in writting? A One I handed to him in writting,yes: that I know for certain. In the other cases, and as far as I can recollect, the matters were discussed verbally. Q Did you keep a copy of that protest? A I have nothing left, Mr President, not a single piece of paper. Q Did you keep a copy of the protest ? I did not ask you whether you had a copy; I asked you whether you kept a copy. Did you make a copy? A I had a draft as well as a handwritten document, which I had given to him through the chief adjutant. I think I had the draft in my personal files, but no longer have it and I don't know where these files have gone. They could possibly be or have been in the hands of the Chief of the Central Armed Forces Department, who dealt with personal matters in my office. Later on they may have got into hands of the chief adjutant of the Fuehrer, that I don't know and I think that the original of that document ought to be available amongst those files, the document which I sent to the Fuehrer at that time. Q And what was the occasion of the protest? A It was made in connection with  another crises in our relationship during which he had expressed his distrust, and it was made in connection with the current controversies on basic matters which existed between us. Q    whom? A I believe it was in 1940 -- 1939-1940, during the winter. Q And you can't say more about it than that it was made on basic matters?
DR. NELTE: A It clearly contained the view that I asked to be able to resign because of the strength of the accusations made against me and on the strength of the reasons which I was quoting.
THE PRESIDENT: That is all. The defendant can return to his scat.
DR. NELTE: May I ask permission to submit the two documents to the Tribunal, the ones which I mentioned before?
THE PRESIDENT: Yes, certainly. Are you going to call in any more witnesses?
DR. NELTE: I had asked the Tribunal to be able to call witness Dr. Lammers.
THE PRESIDENT: Very well.
DR. NELTE: Witness Dr. Lammers please. DR. LAMMERS, a witness, took the stand and testified as follows: BY THE PRESIDENT: Q Will you state your name in full? A Hans Heinrich Lammers. Q Will you repeat this oath after me: I swear by God, the Almighty and Omniscient, that I will speak the pure truth, and will withhold and add nothing. (The witness repeat the oath.)
THE PRESIDENT: You will sit down if you wish. DIRECT EXAMINATION BY DR. NELTE: Q Witness, the main subject on which I wish to question you was the conception of the OKW, its juridiction, and the position held by the defendant Fieldmarshal Keitel as Chief of the OKW. We have, during discussions which we had, talked about the matter subject of which, through previous interrogations and through st atements made by the defendant Keitel appears clarified to me, but since, after statements made by Goering and the defendant and statements to be made by other witnesses it will be clarified, I do not propose to ask you in detail on the subject. But I would like you, as the chief of the Reich Chancellory, to answer questions which others may not know as well as you do, you, who had participated in some way or other when certain decrees, and particularly that of the 4th of February, 1938, were drafted. May I ask you, therefore, to tell me, first of all, how did the decree of February 4, 1938, come about? A The Fuehrer informed me that the Minister of War non Blomberg was going to leave his position, and that on that occasion he wanted to make certain other changes of personnel in the German Government. In particular, he said that the Foreign Minister von Neurath was going to retire and that certain changes would take place in that connection, and that furthermore, in the Supreme Command of the Army, certain alterations were about to be made. Subsequently , 
     he instructed me to draft a decree regarding the chiefs of the army. I was about to participate and collaborate with the Armed Forces Department of the War Ministry as a directive in this connection, and the Fuehrer gave me the following instructions.
THE PRESIDENT: "In the future I no longer want to have a Reich Minister for War; and in the future I no longer want a Supreme Commander of the Armed Forces who would stand between me, the Supreme Commander, and the Supreme Commanders of the Armed Forces Sections." Consequently, the decree was drafted, in which, to start with, the Supreme Commander of the Armed Forces was created in the shape of a military staff which stood under the direct orders of the Fuehrer. The Fuehrer desired that there should be no independent authority in that place which would stand between him and the commanders of the departments of the armed forces. Consequently, Admiral Keitel, who was appointed in that connection, had no authority of command of his own regarding the sub-sections of the armed forces. Such powers could hardly be existing because -
THE PRESIDENT: Has this not been really covered by the defendant Keitel himself?  No question in cross examination has been put to him to challenge any of his statements upon the organization of the OK ; therefore, it seems to the Tribunal it is not  necessary at all.
DR. NELTE: Mr. President  when I spoke a few introductory words, I had asked the witness regarding the development regarding that decree.  I had asked him one question and, persuably, he had to talk a little more regarding the decree of February 4, 1938, to explain it.  I shall try and make Dr. Lammers' examination as short as possible, and I do think that the questions regarding the Chief of the OKW have been clarified, but it is, after all, a principal question.  If a man of the standing of Dr Lammers' can confirm it, then this would probably increse the value of the evidence.
THE PRESIDENT: If the Prosecution had put any questions in cross-examination suggesting that there was any inaccuracy in the evidence which the defendant Keitel had given upon the subject, then, of course, it would be open to you and it would be necessary fur you to call other evidence upon it; but, when the subject is not challenged in any shape or form, it is not necessary to confirm it.
DR. NELTE: In that case, Mr. President, I don't need to ask the witness any questions at all since the subject on which I was going to examine him was the position of the Defendant Keitel as Chief of the OKW;  his position as a Minister; his functions as a so-called Counsel for the Reich's Defense and his functions as a member of the 3 men collegium. In all these cases, no questions have been raised by the Prosecution.
THE PRESIDENT: Dr. Nelte, the Prosecution did raise the question as to whether the Defendant Keitel took part in any political action and upon that you may questionhim.
DR. NELTE: Thank you very much. Dr. Lammers, what can you say on the strength of your personal knowledge, about the question whether the Defendant Field Marshal Keitel did occupy himself with political matters on the strength of his position as Chief of the OKW, or if he did concern himself with them? A As Chief of the OKW, he had, to start with, nothing to do with political matters. The way I understand your question is that you want me to say what Mr. Keitel, in his capacity of Minister of War, did do so far as he cooperated in political matters and what he carried out. I don't quite understand your question. Q This has nothing to do with his position as the Chief of the OKW, in other words, nor has it anything to do with his functions in the Ministry of War. What I am asking you, what I want you to testify to, is the question as to whether you know that the Defendant Keitel, during the time when he held the position of Chief of the OKW, occupied himself with political lines, say foreign political matters in the first place? A Regarding the large scale foreign political affairs, particularly foreign political affairs, I cannot make any statement regarding Keitel since I myself didn't participate in that phase. Q Alright, then. I want to ask you a concrete question. You know that Keitel was present during the reception -- when President Hacha came, when first there were meetings with other statesmen and you, principally, you were present also. Can you say whether during the time that he was presentduring such receptions, was it the function of Field Marshal Keitel to take part in political discussions and to co-operate? A As far as I know,  Keitel has often taken part in discussions with foreign statesmen. I myself did not take part. You have mentioned President Hacha. That was an exception when I was there.
DR. NELTE: In matters regarding the Protectorate, we were not interested in foreign political questions, as far as we are concerned, but during discussions with prominent men from abroad on foreign policy, I was practically never present and I cannot say, therefore, to what extent Keitel did participate during such c onferences, but I assume that he was frequently present during such conferences. Q In other words, you cannot answer that question on the strength of your knowledge. In that case, I am askingyou if, in accordance with the wishes of the decree of 4238, Hitler -- in other words, with whom you have discussed its problems -- stated whether the man who was to take over the position of Chief of the OKW was to have such political functions? Can you say anything on that? A My opinion was that he wasn't to have anything to do with political functions in that sense. He was immediately subordinate to the Fuehrer. Q Did it ever, at any time, become known to you, or did you ever get the impression that Field Marshal Keitel was a political general, in the sense which one usually considers a General political? A I never had that impression.
DR. NELTE: Mr. President, in that case I do not propose to examine the witness further since everything else he was going to make statements on has already been clarified.
THE PRESIDENT: Dr. Nelte, the Tribunal thinks that you may have mis understood what I said to you about whether you should ask any questions 
     about the Defendant Keitel as a member of the Reich's Defense Council. If this witness can give any evidence upon that point, you may question him upon it. BY DR. NELTE: Q Witness, in the law regarding the Reich's Defense of 1938, you, as Chief of the Reichs Chancellery, were appointed a permanent member of the Council for the Reich's Defense. Do you know if this Reich's Defense Law, together with the Council for the Reich's Defense, did it ever become effective. A The Reich's Defense Law was made but has never been promulgated as such. In my opinion, it has never therefore become a law. The contents of the Reich's Defense Law were partially and applied as secret instructions from the Fuehrer. That Reich's Defense Council, as such, as far as I know, never did sit. I, at any rate, have never received an invitation to attend a meeting, and, in my recollection, I have never taken part in any meeting for the Reich's Defense. Two meetings were supposed to have taken place, as I have heard it they have been called meetings of the Reich's Defense Council, but I believe that these meetings, because of the large number of people attending them -- I think there were 60 or 80 called by the Plenipotentiaries for the Four Year Plan -I can remember having partaken in such meetings. Apart from that, after the Reich's Defense Law had been formulated, I have had so little to do with it during the subsequent years that I myself did not remember that I had been appointed a permanent member of this Reich's Defense Council. In such meetings, if they were meetings of the Reich's Defense Council, in which I had partaken, no matters directly concerned with the defense of the Reich were ever discussed, Q Do you know anything about the tasks which the Reich's Defense Council were supposed to have? A I know no more about its tasks than what was contained in the law which was not published.
THE PRESIDENT: As far as I can recall, these were very general, these tasks which were to be performed referred to the Defense of the Reich. Q It has been stated by the Prosecution here that the Council for the Reich's defense was an instrument for the planning of aggressive war. At any rate, an instrument for aggressions and for rearmament. Is there anything you know regarding that, whether the Council for the Reich's Defense or whether members of that Council undertook such tasks? A Not the least is known to me about that. Q I should now like to put a few questions to you regarding the Secret Cabinet Council of which you were supposed to be a member. Defendent Keitel was also a member of the Secret Cabinet Council, and it does, in fact, say so in that law? A When Von Neurath resigned as Foreign Minister, it was the Fuehrer's wish, so far as the outside world was concerned, that the promotion of von Neurath should be emphasized -- be honored. He ordered me to draw up a decree regarding a Secret Cabinet Council which von Neurath would belong to -this Secret Cabinet Council. Apart from that, as far as I can recall, the foreign minister, the deputy of the Fuehrer, Reichsminister Hess, Field Marshal  Keitel, and I myself were to be the other members. I think that's all. But upon creating this, I gathered from statements made by the Fuehrer that this was going to be a matter of a purely formal connection which would create a special position for von Neurath as far as the public was concerned, and I was positively convinced that the Fuehrer would never call a meeting of the Secret Cabinet Council. In fact, the Secret Cabinet Council has never actually met, not even for a constitutional meeting. It never received any tasks from the Fuehrer. It merely existed on paper.
THE PRESIDENT: Mr. Witness, if it was a secret, how could it affect the public? A As far as the public was concerned, the resignation of von Neurath as a foreign minister was to be demonstrated. It was to be demonstrated and made known that there were no differences between von Neurath and the Fuehrer which would have possibly been the cause of his resignation. It was to be demonstrated that he was not being put cut, but in fact, because of his valuable knowledge of foreign political matters, von Neurath was to be given a better position in foreign politics by being appointed President of the Secret Cabinet Council. BY DR. NELTE: Q This, in other words, was a camouflage of his resignation? A Yes. Q I have yet one mere question. As Chief of the OKW, the accusation has been raised against Keitel that he has affixed his signature to certain laws, and I am now asking you what was the significance of the fact that the Chief of the OKW affixed his signature on its laws? A Since he was taking care of the work of the Minister for War, he had to countersign these laws in exercising them. He was assuming responsibility so far as the Fuehrer was concerned, that the armed forces, in other words, establishing connection with the Minister for War. Consequently, so far as the Fuehrer's angle is concerned, he was supposed to ask the Fuehrer whether he could apply his signature or not. In exercising this jurisdiction his authorities were limited whereas Field Marshal Keitel signed the order of the Fuehrer on documents which came under thejurisdiction 
     of the Minister for War. Q In other words, if I understand you correctly, you want to say that Field Marshal Keitel was not a Minister? A He was not a Minister as becomes clear from the decree that is stated. He only has the rank of a Minister. Q Do you mean, in other words, that if he had been a minister that you wouldn't have had to give him full ranking of a minister? But then, he was also a member of the ministerial council for the Reich Government. Didn't that make him a minister?
THE PRESIDENT: A Nothing was altered in his position in the Reich Government through that membership. Q You mean no, don't you? A Yes, I mean no.
DR. NELTE: Thank you very much.
THE PRESIDENT: The Tribunal will adjourn until five minutes past two. (A recess was taken until 1405 hours) Official transcript of the International Military Tribunal in the Matter of The United States of America,the French Republic, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics against Hermann Wilhelm Goering et al, Defendants, sitting at Nurnberg, Germany, on 8 April 1946, 1400 to 1700 hours, Lord Justice Laurence presiding. The witness, Hans Heinrich Lammers, resumed the witness-stand: