Trials of war criminals before the Nuernberg military tribunals under control council law no. 10, volume IIVarious
Philosophy
Trials of war criminals before the Nuernberg military tribunals under control council law no. 10, volume II
Various
Nuremberg Trial of Major German War Criminals, Nuremberg, Germany, 1945-1946; War crime trials -- Germany -- Nuremberg
It goes without saying that the member of a resistance movement can only
refer to his resistance, if this resistance is lawful. This will not
always be the case; for, political crime and similar actions committed
for political motives are crimes and will remain such. He who removes a
political adversary only to take his position or to open the way for his
partisans acts unlawfully and is liable to punishment. The situation,
however, becomes different if not only a political discussion is
interrupted by murder, but where a tyrant whose government is inscribed
with bloody letters in the annals of mankind is at last felled to the
ground. In this case the perpetrator is supported by an acknowledged
excuse. This excuse is self-defense.
According to the German Penal Code, Article 53, an action is not
punishable if it is committed in self-defense. And self-defense is such
defense as is necessary to ward off from oneself or another person an
imminent unlawful attack.
These principles are, however, not only German legal stipulations. They
are legal values of all nations and all times. To a large extent they
tally with human sentiments and are termed “the great law of defense.”
They are already found in Roman law in the formulation “vim vi expellere
[repellere] licet”—force may be driven out by force—and have been
enthusiastically taken over by English common law and by American law,
as stated by Wharton, “Criminal Law”, paragraph 613. They authorize
every individual to ward off injury from himself or another person with
all necessary means at his command. From this point of view too the
struggle against a criminal government threatening the peace of the
world, preparing aggressive wars, ready without any purpose or need to
plunge the whole world into immeasurable misery from sheer striving for
power, from presumption and conceit; struggle and resistance against
such a government and such guidance are lawful and permissible, no
matter by what means they may be carried on. Since the end of the war
even, the opinion has been maintained more and more that such a struggle
is not only lawful and permissible but is even the duty of every
individual. Is not the collective guilt of the whole German nation
substantiated by the charge that it witnessed the doings of the Nazi
government without interfering at least with a secretly clenched fist in
its pocket? Murder and manslaughter, bodily injury and restriction of
liberty inflicted upon the potentates and responsible men of such a
system are acts of self-defense for the benefit of peace and mankind.
They are lawful and exempt from punishment; they are a duty if there is
no help possible in any other way.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account