The Muernberg War Crimes Trials Under Control Goungil Law No
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
ON THE MUERNBERG WAR CRIMES TRIALS UNDER CONTROL GOUNGIL LAW NO. 10 by TELFORD TAYLOR Brigadier General, U. S. A. Chief of Counsel for War Crimes Washington, D. C.JAG SCHOOL 15 August 1949 MAR 2 0 1997 LIBRARY For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U. 8. Government Printing Oflee Washington 25, D. C. - Price 70 cents fioc LETTER OF TRANSMI~AL------,------------------------------------ v INTR~D~~ION-----------------------------------------------------VII HISTORICALBACKGROUND.......................................... 1 J. C. S. 1023/10............................................... 4 Control Council Law No. 10.................................... 6 Executive Order No. 9679-------------------------------------- 10 THE "SUBSEQUENTPROCEEDINGS DIVISION" OF OCCPAC------------- 13 Staff Recruitment and Organization .............................. 14 Operations---------------------------------------------------- 15 A SECONDTRIAL UNDERTHE LONDONCHARTER?.................... 22 MILITARYGOVERNMENTORDINANCE NO. 7.......................... 28 THE MILITARYTRIBUNALS, THE SECRETARYGENERAL, AND THE OFFICE, CHIEFOF COUNSELFOR WAR CRIMES.............................. The Military Tribunals The Central Secretariat- - -------_--------------------y---------- The Office, Chief of Counsel for War Crimes ....................... Foreign Delegations --------- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ---- - - - - - - - ---- - Defense Counsel----------------------------------------------- WAR CRIMESSUSPECTS AND WITNESSES............................. Incarceration------------------------------------------------- Interrogation------------------------------------------------- The Charges-------------------------------------------------- Form of the Indictments- - ...................................... Selection of Defendants- - ................................. ----- THE TRIAI,S.----------------------------------------------------- Landsberg DocumentDisposal----------_---------------------------------- Publications-------------------------------------------------- CONCLUSION_-........................................ ------------ Operational Shortcomings and Their Lessons for the Future--- -- - -- Significance and Influence of the Trials........................... APPENDICE~------------------------------------------------------ A. Interim Report to the Secretary of the Army, 12 May 194%----- B. Nuremberg Trials: War Crimes and International Law, by Telford Taylor, in "International Conciliation" (April 1949) - - - - - - ---- C. J. C. S. 1023/10, 8 July 1945................................. D. Control Council Law No. 10, 20 December 1945---------------- E. The Royal Warrant, 14 June 1945............................ F. Correspondence and memoranda of December 1945 proposing basis for trials under Law No. 10................................ G. Executive Order No. 9679, 17 January 1946.................... H. OCCPAC General Memorandum No. 15, 29 March 1946-------- I. Meeting of Chief Prosecutors under London Charter, 5 April 1946- J. Deputy Chief Counsel's Report to the Secretary of War, 29 July 1946------------------------------------------------ K. United States Diplomatic Note of 22 January 1947- ------------ L. Military Governnient Ordinance No. 7, 18 October 1946--------- M. Military Government Ordinance No. 11, 17 February 1947- - - - - - N. USFET General Orders No. 301, 24 October 1946-------------- 0. Organization Chart of OCCWC ------------------------------ P. Strength of Nuernberg War Crimes Agencies, 1946-1949--..------ Q. List of Counsel for the Defense ................................. R. Memorandum: Interrogation Procedures, 10 April 1947- - ------- S. Handbill Soliciting Relief for Landsberg Inmates- -------------- DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY WASHINGTON 25. D. C. 15 August 1949 Secretary of the Army Washington 25, D. C. I have the honor to submit herewith the final report of the OBce, Chief of Com- sel for War Crimes on the Nuernberg war crimes trials held under the authority of Control Council Law No. 10. An interim statement on the progress of the trials (attached to this report as Appendix A) was submitted by me to the Secretary of the Army (then the Honor- able Kenneth .C. Royall) on 12 May 1948. At that time four trials were still in process, all of which have since been concluded by the rendition of judgments. The sentences imposed by the Nuernberg Tribunals in eleven of the twelve cases (all except United States v. Ernst von, Weixsaecker, Case No. 11) have all been reviewed by the Military Governor. With a single exception, in which a death sentence imposed by a Tribunal (in United States v. Oswald Pohl, Case No. 4) was reduced to life imprisonment, all were confirmed. Seven of the twenty-three death sentences imposed (and confirmed) have been carried out, and the other condemned men are confined at Landsberg Prison in Bavaria, where the jail sentences of the other convicts are being served. Publication of the judgments and other important records of the trials is in process. This report does not cover the activities of the Secretary-General of the Nuern- berg Military Tribunals, who was directly responsible to the Deputy Military Governor. I am advised by the Secretary-General (Dr. Howard H. Russell) that his anal report will be submitted to the High Commissioner in due course. With the submission of this report my task as Chief of Counsel for War Crimes and as Chief Prosecutor for the United States under the London Charter is con- clucted, and I respectfully request that my assignment in those capacities be terminated forthwith. Respectfully yours, - TELFORD TAYLOR Brigadier General, UBA Chief of Counsel for War Grim3 INTRODUCTION Primarily, this report undertakes to describe the creation, organiza- tion, and functioning of the Ofice, Chief of Counsel for War Crimes (OCCWC). The need for such an agency was envisaged by the The- ater Judge Advocate (the late Brig. Gen. Edward C. Betts) and the Director of the Legal Division of OMGUS (then Mr. Charles Fahy) in October 1945. The OCCWC was officially established on 24 October 1946, shortly after rendition of the judgment in the first Nuernberg trial before the International Military Tribunal (IMT), and was formally deactivated on 20 June 1949. This report covers the entire period from October 1945to June 1949. The basic policies which governed the operations of OCCWC were in part prescribed by higher authority-through OMGUS and the Department of the Army-and in part determined by me as Chief of Counsel for War Crimes. The evolution and execution of these poli- cies are sketched herein. Throughout, principal attention has been devoted to the 'Lexecutive77and "administrative7' operations of the OCCWC, including such matters as the preparation of Military Gov- ernment Ordinance No. 7 (under which the Nuernberg Military Tri- bunals were constituted), selection of defendants, methods of interro- gation of witnesses and suspects, handling of linguistic problems, and cooperation with other governments in the field of war crimes. These things may seem of minor importance and prove of little inter- est to those who are chiefly interested in the actual outcome of the trials, the legal reasoning of the judgments, the historical revelations of the documents and testimony, or the immediate and long-term significance of the trials in world affairs. I have touched on some of the legal and historical features of the trials toward the end of the report, and have dealt with them more fully in the April 1949 issue of Internatiod ConciZiation (attached hereto as Appendix B). In any event, on such subjects there will be no lack of books and articles in the years to come ; indeed the Nuernberg bibliography is already sufficiently impressive. Glamorless as thisaescription of the Nuernberg "machinery" may be, it wants writing. There is more to a judicial process than the records and judgments in the decided cases. The Nuernberg trials were car- lNuremberg Trials: War Urimes and International Law, by Telford Taylor, comprising the April 1949 issue of "International Conciliation" (published by the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace), with a foreword by Dr. James T. Shotwell, President of the Endowment, infra, p. 122 ried out under quadripartite authority, but in pursuit of objectives thought to be of benefit to all mankind. It is important, therefore, not only that the documents, testimony, and jud,ments be widely pub- lished, but also that a record be left telling how the individual defend- ants were selected, who prosecuted and who defended them, and how the charges were drawn, and describing the administrative parapher- nalia of the Nuernberg process. This report is an attempt to supply that record, and no effort has been made to "jazz up" the account for the general reader. HISTORICAL BACKGROUND The Nuernberg trials, like other war-crimes trials, were based on the proposition that international penal law is judicially enforceable law, and that it therefore may cbnd should be enforced by criminal process. The United States was a leading participant in the planning a,ndexecution of the Nuernberg trials, but the basic proposition is not purely or even primarily American, but rather of very cosmopolitan origin. Its roots ars ancient, end Nuernberg is by no means the first instance of its application. To trace the historical antecedents of the many war crimes trials held since the conclusion of World War 11 would be, therefore, a formidable task for any scholar. Even the conferences, reports, and other events