Trials of war criminals before the Nuernberg military tribunals under control council law no. 10, volume IIIVarious
History
Trials of war criminals before the Nuernberg military tribunals under control council law no. 10, volume III
Various
Nuremberg Trial of Major German War Criminals, Nuremberg, Germany, 1945-1946; War crime trials -- Germany -- Nuremberg
I expect to relieve us of much of this wearisome detail by first
treating and solving problems, touched upon by coarsening efforts,
misrepresentations, distortions, and half-truths in their entirety and
from the broadest viewpoints possible.
At this point in the proceedings, I do not wish to put to the fore
legal questions within the framework of the defense, such as the
concept of conspiracy or the subjective fact and the confines of the
crimes against humanity.
On the other hand, it will be unavoidable within the frame of the
producing of evidence to convince the court that the entirely
individual biased power position between the state on the one hand and
the individual judge or prosecutor on the other hand in accordance
with the regulations governing German civil servants allows no scope
in the field of the application of the law for a simultaneously
existing intellectual alliance in the sense of a conspiracy, but that
a connection of this power position, in full knowledge of its legal
nature, with a simultaneous assumption of a conspiracy would mean a
contradiction in itself. Here it becomes necessary to prove that the
activity of a judge at the Special Court or a Reich public prosecutor
is limited to the application of the law which is based on the official
Reich legislation in the field of criminal law. I shall demonstrate
that this Reich legislation in all its harshness has, in its purpose,
neither lost nor limited its character of purely criminal law and that,
on this point, it has not been misinterpreted as clearly proved by the
literature on the subject and the jurisdiction by the supreme judicial
authorities and others.
Here must be proved a fact evident in itself, namely that judges and
prosecutors in the same position as Rothaug were never and in no
context expected to have objects alien to the field of criminal law in
carrying out their official duties.
Records of sentences already submitted and others still to be submitted
will prove that this had in no way been intended.
This touches on the legal question, whether official functions resting
on the official Reich legislation which, up to this very moment, is
covered in international law by the principle of nationality and
sovereignty, functions which were carried out in public, may be
conceived as actions of persecution on racial, religious, or political
grounds and may be treated as being on the same level as actions which
were carried out secretly and without control, and which could be
recognized as wrong already by their cruelty and severity by every
person concerned as offending against justice and law.
Here, I wish to convince the Court that offenses of the latter kind,
if they ever did happen within the legal sphere could and should only
be known to the immediate participants but not to persons who held
positions like the defendant Rothaug.
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