dtufail/nuremberg-trials-corpus huggingface dataset:
every state is subordinate in peace and in war in their actions. What is contrary to law in the individual case, that again is decided by the judge according to his estimate and his standards, according not only to the opinion of his time but also of his people; he decides accordingly what his people accept as worthy in their lives and what they recognize as such. One can be so bold as to state then: Right and wrong is, even if one acknowledges the existence of a divine idea of right, nevertheless in its last analysis a political question. This becomes particularly obvious in wartime when the conceptions of right of the parties waging not diverge hopelessly, wherein not only the reason of state but also especially the "necessite de la guerre" plays an important part. I do not believe that the defendant Hermann Pook will be seriously held responsible for the medical experiments in the concentration camps and the so-called slave labor, but I wish to point out that just on this point particularly with respect to these two spheres, the distinction between right and wrong is not at all unequivocal and clear, this applies even more so to the setting up of concentration camps as such. 4. To this must be added that not every illegal act in itself is punishable under criminal law. Whoever violates a distinct law of nations, whether it arises from an international agreement or "out of custom established among civilized nations, out of the laws of humanity and the demands of the public conscience," is only then responsible in the eyes of criminal law if a genuine " jus strictum " (strictly defined law) is involved. In other words, not a must-precept or a recommendation which the parties to the agreement have given each other for their national legislation. An infraction of the rules of equity is since time immemorial not criminally punishable, for the rules of equity exist rather in the soul of the people and in the perception of the judge. The question of the jus strictum leads at the same time right back to the question of criminal responsibility. The Control Council Law gives fact cases which can be regarded as jus strictum only insofar as they are in conformity with fact cases of the
the people and in the perception of the judge. The question of the jus strictum leads at the same time right back to the question of criminal responsibility. The Control Council Law gives fact cases which can be regarded as jus strictum only insofar as they are in conformity with fact cases of the national German penal code. It would be contrary to logic as well as to the generally accepted principles of modern penal law if one were to assume for oneself the right of defining the existence of say, an "inhumane act," because an "inhumane act" is a word for a moral quality or lack of quality, and not an objective case founded on facts. Furthermore, it would again be contrary to ethics and generally accepted legal principles appertaining to criminal law if today one were to find somebody guilty in retrospect because he has violated a law which at the time of the perpetration of the act was not even in existence, not to speak of being punishable. On the contrary, perhaps the act which today is unlawful and punishable was at that time explicitly ordered by the state. 5. At this time I must also discuss the question of the legitimate order by a superior. Already from the Roman law to the modern law of today of all civilized countries a legitimate order by a superior exempts the perpetrator from guilt. He whose will is bound by a valid order is not legally responsible in the eyes of criminal law, because the will of the one who gives the order supersedes the will of the obeying. If the order is unlawful, criminal, and appears so to the obeying party, but only then responsibility in the eyes of criminal law of the obeying party can be considered. Otherwise as a matter of fairness and humanity the duty of a soldier to obey must be respected. The defendant Hermann Pook, too, was a soldier and was subject to the provisions of the German Military Criminal Code. Of course, one should not and must not attempt to justify every war crime by the fact that it was ordered from above, but on the other hand one cannot disregard the fact that as a general rule the soldier is entirely wrapped up in the army mentality and that with the increasing war hardships the confusion of the soldier
one should not and must not attempt to justify every war crime by the fact that it was ordered from above, but on the other hand one cannot disregard the fact that as a general rule the soldier is entirely wrapped up in the army mentality and that with the increasing war hardships the confusion of the soldier also increases and his ability of moral criticism decreases. This is the reasoning of an ancient author. When the Control Council Law No. 10 prescribes: The fact that a person acts under orders of his government or his superior does not absolve him of the responsibility for a crime; it can, however, be regarded as a mitigating circumstance, it is thereby unquestionably not intended that the subordinate is automatically responsible in the eyes of criminal law; this would be contrary to all legal principles. Obviously only the burden of proof is thereby put on the subordinate; it is up to him to prove to what extent he is not responsible; for instance, that he was unable to recognize the order as unlawful and criminal. If he cannot exonerate himself in accordance with general principles of law, the order by the superior can still be considered as mitigating circumstance. The defendant Hermann Pook was drafted into the Waffen SS in 1940 and was transferred toward the end of 1943 to the office D III as leading dental surgeon. In both cases, therefore, he obeyed military orders. The defendant belonged to the Reiter SS [SS cavalry] which was explicitly absolved from criminal guilt by the International Military Tribunal in its verdict. He can only be sentenced if his guilt can be proved in actual and legal respect. It will not be possible for the Tribunal to base a sentence on an assumption, much less on a fiction of criminal culpability. NOTES: (1) Defendant before the International Military Tribunal. See Trial of the Major War Criminals, vols I-XLII , Nuremberg 1947. Back (2) These Prisoners were sent to Germany pursuant to a decree (Bei Nacht und Nebel by night and fog) which ordered their removal to Germany in greatest secrecy. See cases United State vs. Josef Altstoetter, et al., vol, III and United States vs. Ernst von Weizsaecker, et al., vol. XII, XIII. XIV. Back (3) Trial of the Major War
were sent to Germany pursuant to a decree (Bei Nacht und Nebel by night and fog) which ordered their removal to Germany in greatest secrecy. See cases United State vs. Josef Altstoetter, et al., vol, III and United States vs. Ernst von Weizsaecker, et al., vol. XII, XIII. XIV. Back (3) Trial of the Major War Criminals , op. cit. supra, vol. I pp. 234-235. Back (4) A considerable amount of material concerning the utilization of concentration camp inmates for medical experiments is published in the case of United States vs. Karl Brandt. et al., Vols, I and II. No selections from the arguments and evidence concerning medical experiments have been reproduced in this case. Back (5) Trial of the Major War Criminals, op. cit. supra, p. 247. Back (6) Defendants before International Military Tribunal. See Trial of the Major War Criminals , op. cit. supra, vol. I-XLII. Back (7) See selections from Pictorial Report on Destruction of Warsaw Ghetto, p. 631. Back (8) Defendant in case of United States vs. Karl Brandt, et al., vols. I and II. Back (9) Complete opening statement is recorded in mimeographed transcript, 14 May 1947, pp. 1099-1121. Back (10) Opening statement is recorded in mimeographed transcript, 14 May 1947, pp. 1176-1184. Back (11) Opening statement is recorded in mimeographed transcript, 5/15/1947, pp. 1237-1252. Back Source: Trials of the War Criminals before the Nuernberg Military Tribunals under Control Council Law No. 10 Nuernberg October 1946-April 1949 Volume V Washington, DC : Government Printing Office, 1950 Nuremberg War Crimes Trial Page The Pohl Case © 2008 Lillian Goldman Law Library 127 Wall Street, New Haven, CT 06511. Avalon Statement of Purpose Accessibility at Yale Contact Us Yale Law Library University Library Yale Law School Search Morris Search Orbis
USA v. Pohl et. al - Selections From the Evidence IV. Selections From the Evidence on Important Aspects of the Case A. Development and Organization of the WVHA (SS Economic and Administrative Main Office) I. Introduction The "SS Economic and Administrative Main Office (WVHA)" the of the twelve "Main Offices" of the SS was established under that name in early 1942. The defendant Pohl was the chief of this office, and he had been the chief of similar offices which existed before under different names. The evolution, organization, personnel, and tasks of this office are the principal subjects of the materials included in this section. Evidence of the prosecution on pages 293 to 319 is followed by evidence of the defense on pages 319 to 348. All the defendants were officials in the WVHA. During the trial questions of the criminal responsibility of the individual defendants were often not separable from the organization of the WVHA and the position of a particular defendant in that organization. Hence, materials related to substantive crimes are contained in the present section on organization of the WVHA, and in turn, materials related to organization again appear in the later section dealing principally with the alleged substantive crimes. Special reference is made to the subsection VI B, "The Defense of Mere Organizational or Administrative Association" on pages 786 to 801. The defense evidence reproduced in that section was calculated to show that there was no criminal responsibility because of the particular type of work performed by individual defendants within the organization framework of the WVHA. 2. Selections From Evidence of the Prosecution Prosecution Documents Doc. No. Pros. Ex. No. Description of Document NO-620 33 Table of organization of the SS Main Office Budget and Buildings and Main Office Administration and Economy before the establishment of the WVHA. NO-1451 21 Himmler's order, 4/20/1939 establishing the "Main Office Administration and Economy" also known as "Administrative and Economic Main Office." NO-019(a) 24 Extract from letter of Himmler, December 1939, to SS Gruppenfuehrer Hildebrandt, stating responsibilities of Gluecks and defendant Pohl. NO-3698 556 Letter from defendant Georg Loerner, 9/23/1940, concerning establishment of
and Economy" also known as "Administrative and Economic Main Office." NO-019(a) 24 Extract from letter of Himmler, December 1939, to SS Gruppenfuehrer Hildebrandt, stating responsibilities of Gluecks and defendant Pohl. NO-3698 556 Letter from defendant Georg Loerner, 9/23/1940, concerning establishment of branch offices of the Main Office Budget and Buildings at the concentration camps to handle labor allocation of prisoners. NO-495 37 Circular of defendant Pohl, 1/19/1942, announcing new organizational set-up under WVHA, and stating positions of defendants Frank, Georg Loerner, and Pohl. R-129 40 Report by Pohl to Himmler, 4/30/1942, re taking over Inspectorate of Concentration Camps; circular of Pohl, same date, on administration of the camps. NO-719 42 Himmler's reply, 5/29/1942, to defendant Pohl's report of 4/30/1942. 1063(F)-PS 39 Circular of Mueller (RSHA), 5/30/1942, announcing transfer of office of Inspector of Concentration Camps to WVHA, as division D. NO-1994 88 Report by defendant Pohl to Himmler, 7/28/1942, asking approval for transfer, promotion, and detachment of concentration camp commanders; answer by Brandt, on behalf of Himmler, 8/23/1942. NO-4510 718 Order signed by defendant Fanslau, 8/27/1942, transferring concentration camp Commander Suhren from Sachsenhausen to Ravensbrueck. NO-1016 46 Note to defendant Fanslau, 7/13/1944, 309 for defendant Volk, and enclosure: description of "Organization and Tasks of office group W" of WVHA. NO-111 38 Table of organization of WVHA (un-dated). Testimony Extracts from the testimony of the defendant Pohl. Extracts from testimony of defendant Georg Loerner. Extract from testimony of defendant Sommer. Extracts from testimony of defendant Fanslau. Source: Trials of the War Criminals before the Nuernberg Military Tribunals under Control Council Law No. 10 Nuernberg October 1946-April 1949 Volume V Washington, DC : Government Printing Office, 1950 Nuremberg War Crimes Trial Page The Pohl Case © 2008 Lillian Goldman Law Library 127 Wall Street, New Haven, CT 06511. Avalon Statement of Purpose Accessibility at Yale Contact Us Yale Law Library University Library Yale Law School Search Morris Search Orbis
Document No. 2171-PS Previous Document Volume IV Menu Next Document COPY OF DOCUMENT 2171-PS Report B-2833Report B-2833 THE NUMERICAL EXPANSION OF THE CONCENTRATION CAMP BUCHENWALD DURING THE YEARS 1937-1945 (Based on the complete records of the competent service units) PREFACE The following figures are compiled from authentic material that the SS in their flight from the camp were unable to destroy. Particular attention is called to the fact that every number can be substantiated by the personal records of the prisoners in question. I In July 1937 the first advance headquarters of the so-called professional criminals arrived on the completely unimproved, untouched wooded terrain of the Ettersberg near Weimar for the construction of a new large concentration camp. At the time the SS had not yet named the future camp and called it KL Ettersberg. The first roll call was made on 19 July 1937 and recorded 1949 prisoners. On the following day 70 prophylactic prisoners, that is to say so-called professional criminals from the KL Sachsenburg, arrived. On the 27th of July the first 91 political prisoners, among them 7 Bible research students also arrived from the KL Sachsenburg. On the 29 July 1937 the name "KL Buchenwald" appeared for the first time in the official correspondence. At that time the number in the camp had increased to 327 persons. On 30 July 1937 600 prisoners from the KL Lichtenburg were added and another convoy from the Lichte [Lichtenburg] arrived on 6 August 1937. On the lists of the Reich's German nationals the name of Hermann Kempek appears as the first deceased, who died on 13 August 1937 in Buchenwald. The two next dead persons are already reported on 15 August 1937. Additional convoys followed from Sachsenburg and the Lichte individual arrivals were also recorded. The total number of arrivals in the year 1937 amounted to 2,912 persons. By 1 January 1938 already 48 or 1.65% of them had died. The last roll call made by the SS took place on 3 April 1945. At the time the number of prisoners in the camp amounted to 80,011 persons. On 11 April 1945 the victorious Allied troops liberated the concentration camp. The expansion of the concentration camp is shown in Table 1, which gives the total number of arrivals and the deceased for each year. Table 1
At the time the number of prisoners in the camp amounted to 80,011 persons. On 11 April 1945 the victorious Allied troops liberated the concentration camp. The expansion of the concentration camp is shown in Table 1, which gives the total number of arrivals and the deceased for each year. Table 1 Year 1937 1938 1939 1940 1941 1942 1943 1944 1945 (3 month) Total Arrivals 2,912 20,122 9,553 2,525 5,890 14,111 42,177 97,866 43,823 238,980 Deceased 48 771 1,235 1,772 1,522 2,898 3,516 8,644 13,056 33,462 It is self-evident that under normal living conditions only a minor fraction of these 33,462 persons would have died. Most of them had reached the best years of their manhood. The living and working conditions in Buchenwald were such that every one could easily contract a serious illness, especially during the first months, owing to the sudden and violent change in their daily habits of life. In Buchenwald a serious illness resulted nearly always in death, because during the first years no medical help was dispensed or was so inefficient that the hope of a recovery was perforce without any prospects. The number of unnatural deaths also reached a shocking figure. In desperation many chose voluntary death by hanging themselves or touching the electrically charged wire fence. In addition in the KL Buchenwald, like everywhere else where the SS and the Gestapo were in charge, numerous prisoners were shot "In flight". This "shooting-in-flight" was often conducted after a certain pattern by forcing the prisoners in the labor units to cross the line of guards. This happened especially in the stone quarries, where they were maltreated to such a degree that in desperation they could find no other way of escape. The nearest SS guard would shoot them down only a few yards beyond the line. In the following Table 2 are not included those who were wounded by rifle fire or those who died in the camp area from the results of the maltreatment they received. Table 2 Year 1937 1938 1939 1940 1941 1942 1943 1944 1945 Number shot while in flight 7 34 9 89 16 48 46 no accurate record no accurate record Number who chose voluntary death --- 11 3 11 17 3 2 46 16 A satanical asphyxiation installation equal to the one in the KL Auschwitz was not erected in the KL Buchenwald. The SS
1945 Number shot while in flight 7 34 9 89 16 48 46 no accurate record no accurate record Number who chose voluntary death --- 11 3 11 17 3 2 46 16 A satanical asphyxiation installation equal to the one in the KL Auschwitz was not erected in the KL Buchenwald. The SS probably feared that they would not be able to keep the secret in the most densely settled part of Germany. But this does not mean that we were spared such installation in Buchenwald. Already on 13 July 1941 a convoy was formed consisting of 94 "invalide", German Reich nationals and Poles, for the greater part but not exclusively Jews, and taken to Hohenstein near Dresden, guarded by heavily armed SS troopers. On the following day 93 more were dispatched. Several days later their clothes, including their personal effects, false teeth, etc., were returned to Buchenwald. In so far it became known at that time these persons were poisoned by gas at the place of their destination. It is probable that the SS had already at that time perfected its asphyxiation chambers and tested them. On 2, 11 and 12 March 1942 further convoys followed containing 285 prisoners, exclusively Jews. Beginning Fall 1942 increasingly larger mass transports and individual transports of Jews, who had already been a long time in the camp, to KL Auschwitz took place, where unquestionably they were murdered. For this reason these prisoners were probably not entered on the records of the KL Auschwitz. In detail it concerns the following transports: 27 July 1942 163 prisoners, among them 119 Soviet PWs.s 26 Sept. 1942 200 gypsies. 6 Oct. 1944 1,183 Jews. It can no longer be determined today how high the number of the individual transports ran, but it is definite that these individual transports were carried out on special instructions from Berlin. Since the beginning of the War a continually rising number of executions were carried out in the KL Buchenwald. The shooting or hanging of individual persons or of certain categories of prisoners took place on the basis of the orders issued by the SS Reich Management without any judicial verdict. Three executions in the KL Buchenwald by hanging were performed in public, that is to say, before the entire assembled camp inmates on the roll call grounds. The first prisoner
of certain categories of prisoners took place on the basis of the orders issued by the SS Reich Management without any judicial verdict. Three executions in the KL Buchenwald by hanging were performed in public, that is to say, before the entire assembled camp inmates on the roll call grounds. The first prisoner was hung on 4 June 1938, the second on 21 December 1938, both of whom had beaten down their SS guards in their flight from an advance headquarters on 8 May 1938. The victim of the third execution on 13 September 1944 was a recaptured fugitive. When other prisoners in the camp were to be executed they were called to the entrance and taken away. Exact figures can only be given with certainty for the years 1944 and 1945, because until then such prisoners were recorded as being turned over to the Gestapo and it is no longer possible to determine now which were actually turned over and which only allegedly. In the year 1944 at least 177 and in 1945 at least 54 prisoners of the camp were executed. The mass executions of Soviet prisoners of war, officers, political officers and troops were introduced. However, Polish officers, German officials and higher ranking officers as well as German and foreign women were executed in Buchenwald. At that time the execution places were installed in the DAW terrain and in the horse stable and the crematory was considerably enlarged. Upon arrival, those destined to be executed were not entered on the camp records, but were separated from those arriving simultaneously in the normal course of procedure and handed over to the Court of Justice Division for "special treatment", which in official language meant, for execution. Unfortunately the SS had already destroyed on 1 and 2 April 1945 all the relating documents therefore no figures of any kind can be quoted. Based on the observations of the prisoners it would seem that approximately 7,000 persons were executed. Furthermore to the total number of those who died in the concentration camp Buchenwald must be added the others who were killed in April 1945 during the retransport from the advance headquarters to the camp, in the advance headquarters itself and on the march. In addition innumerable others must be added, who during the evacuation of the camp died in other camps
in the concentration camp Buchenwald must be added the others who were killed in April 1945 during the retransport from the advance headquarters to the camp, in the advance headquarters itself and on the march. In addition innumerable others must be added, who during the evacuation of the camp died in other camps enroute. If on the whole the number of the victims of death is set at 50,000 this frightful figure will not be estimated too high. II The development of the camp shall now be followed in all its details. The camp strength rose gradually after 1 January 1938 until it reached the figure of 3,000 on 1 May 1938. Then the phase "Arbeitsscheu Reich" (shirking to work for the Reich) set in. The first "asocials" 5 May 1938. Larger transports of a total of 1,000 "asocial" Jews arrived on 14 and 15 June 1938. With this event the camp strength jumped and reached its first high point of 7,968 on 7 August 1938. The number of the dead also jumped. Whereas the number of dead prisoners amounted to 4 in April 1938 it amounted to 16 in May, 62 in June and 105 in July. In the following months the camp strength slowly decreased through deaths and discharges and only amounted to 7,791 persons on 1 September 1938. The first foreigners arrived in September 1938, namely, in round figures, 2,200 Austrian Jews from the KL Dachau. This influx increased the camp strength to 10,471 on 1 October 1938. In November 1938 the notorious great movement against the Jews in the Third Reich was carried through, which Hitler tried to justify by referring to the attempt on the life of the official of the German Embassy in Paris, von Rath. In a very short time the camp strength doubled itself. whereas on 9 November 1938 it still amounted to 9,842, it had grown to 19,676 on 13 November 1938. No lodging facilities were available for such an increase. Temporarily the new arrivals were camped on the roll call ground and in the half completed sheep stable, until very primitive wooden barracks without any sanitary installations were created alongside the roll call grounds, which later became famous as the Blocks 1a-5a. During the first few days the SS had no clear survey that the keeper of the records would announce over the loudspeaker, "If another Jew hangs himself, will he