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
A. In view of that situation, what could a Ministry of Justice do which
was directed merely by an Under-Secretary as acting Minister who,
furthermore, was not a member of the Party and whose words, naturally,
did not get the same hearing as those of a Minister; a man who, as the
indictment said, never attained cabinet rank? According to an express
instruction by Hitler, the chief only was told those things which were
necessary for him to fulfill his own task. It is evident that that
instruction made possible all kinds of limitations. * * *
(Recess)
Q. Witness, before the recess we discussed the possibilities at the
disposal of these power groups. Please, will you continue.
A. I ventured to point out that Hitler had given an explicit order
that a chief of any office should only be instructed about that which
he had to know in order to carry out his tasks. And that went very
far. That situation is better explained by the fact that Minister
Guertner, for instance, only found out about the euthanasia decree[169]
when in reports on the situation rendered by the presidents of the
district courts of appeal, a certain suspicion arose that this decree
was carried out, and Guertner categorically demanded an elucidation.
Whereas other ministers were authorized to listen to foreign
broadcasts, that was prohibited to the Minister of Justice under threat
of punishment. When I objected against this, I was told in reply that I
should turn to the Ministry of Propaganda which would inform me about
everything that happened.
I may point out that the opinion of the International Military Tribunal
states that on account of the control over broadcasting and the press,
and the propaganda machine, an independent judgment based on freedom of
thought became an absolute impossibility. I, from my own experience,
can only confirm that statement. A significant example is given by the
following occurrence--an example showing the extent of that spy system.
The Gauleiter of East Prussia had protested against the administration
of justice in his district. In order to examine these complaints in
1940 or 1941--I do not know the date precisely any more--I traveled
to Koenigsberg and found out that as for the reports by the president
of the district court of appeal, the Gauleiter was informed about
these reports sooner than I was. Based on warnings received from
reliable sources, I had to expect that in the various offices of
the municipality which I had to visit, special microphones had been
installed for the occasion of my visit, and I could only talk with
my personal Referent by driving out to the beach and picking out an
isolated beach chair there in order to be able to talk to him without
anybody listening to us and spying on us.
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