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
I shall now deal with the individual reasons for the exclusion of
injustice and guilt, which according to the result of the evidence
preclude the culpability of the defendant’s behavior. I am hereby taking
into consideration that the assumption of only one of the reasons for
the exclusion of punishment which we shall now deal with suffices to
justify the defendant’s behavior and to exonerate him of the offense in
the sense of a personal culpability because of his commission or
omission. The individual reasons for the exclusion of culpability are
discussed without taking into consideration whether the examination of
any further similar reasons is superfluous, since the assumption of
another reason for the exclusion of culpability suffices to secure the
intended success. Evidence has proved that the experiments for testing
sulfanilamides were carried out, to begin with, on fifteen professional
male criminals who had been sentenced to death. Had they survived the
experiments, they would have been granted a pardon therefor. Considering
that this part of the experiment is not a subject of the indictment, I
need not go into detail about it.
To the second and third group (the sulfanilamide experiments) belonged
as experimental subjects members of the Polish Resistance Movement, who,
in view of their activity in this illegal movement, had been sentenced
to death by German courts martial.
It is a principle of German criminal law that in any case the consent of
the offender precludes the illegality of the action. This principle is
not only found in German law but is an established part of practically
all legal systems. Consequently, we have to examine the question whether
the experimental subjects gave their consent to the experiments. When
examining the question whether legally effective consent had been given,
it will not matter so much whether the experimental subjects expressly
declared their consent. However, if generally acknowledged principles
are applied, one may presume that they expressed their consent in some
obvious manner. It is clear that consent could also have been given
tacitly and by conclusive action.
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.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account