The Nuremberg Trials

1
The Nuremberg Trials
2
The End of WWII
3
What next?
De Gaulle
Truman
Churchill
Stalin

• Already decided at the Teheran Conference in Nov
  1943.
• Procedures set out by London Charter of the
  International Military Tribunal (Aug 1945) To
  bring to trial and punish the major war
  criminals of the Axis countries

4
Why?

• Needed to make an example of Nazi leaders for a
  variety of reasons
• Atrocities part of govt policy, not just
  individuals.
• Ensure the German people knew what had happened.
• Hope that the example made would ensure no
  further repeats.
• Give the United Nations a reputation for morals.

5
The Nuremberg Trials

• The Nuremberg Trials was the name given to a
  series of trials that prosecuted prominent
  members of the political, economic military
  leadership of Nazi Germany.
• One major twelve subsequent trials.
• Only Germans were prosecuted. Why?
• Russia was one of the Big Three Allies
• Italy had ended the war as an Allied nation
• Japan dealt with separately
• They lost!

6
The Nuremberg Trials

• The first Trials began October 18, 1945 with
  defendants charged with one or more of the
  following
• Conspiracy or participation in a common plan
  to commit crimes against peace.
• Crimes against peace (planning, initiating
  waging wars of aggression)
• War crimes
• Crimes against humanity
• The Charter stated that holding an official
  position was no defence to war crimes. Obedience
  to orders could only be considered in regards to
  mitigation of punishment if the Tribunal
  determined that justice so required.

7
(Some of) The Accused
Jodl
Hess
Bormann
Goring
Speer
Kaltenbrunner
Von Papen
Krupp
8
Results
SHORT TERM It saw the death and incarceration of
21 German major war criminals
Julius Streicher
Nuremberg Trials Defendants in their dock. The
main target of the prosecution was Hermann Göring
(left on the first row), considered to be the
most important surviving official in the Third
Reich after Hitler's death.
LONG TERM It set the precedent in International
Law for crimes against humanity
9
The Legitimacy of the Trials

• History is about winners, not about losers.
• History is about assessing distortions, not
  copying out truths.
• History has much to say about the way the
  powerful handle power, for power endangers
  records.
• History is about evidence, and evidence
  flagrantly distorts. There is a bias between
  winners and losers.
• History is hopeless on love, but excellent on
  hatred. Such a state of things may not please
  all, but then history was never meant to please.
• History Extension Source Book of Readings (NSW
  Board of Studies)

10
The Legitimacy of the Trials

• What gave the trials legitimacy?
• Nazi Germanys unconditional surrender
• Hague (1899 1907) Geneva (1925) Conventions
  on the conduct of warfare
• Kellogg-Briand Pact 1928
• Punishments varied according to guilt.

11
The Legitimacy of the Trials

• What made the trials illegitimate?
• Article 3 Neither the Tribunal, its members or
  their alternates can be challenged by the
  prosecution or by any of the defendants, at any
  time.
• Article 16A During any preliminary examination
  or trial of a defendant, he will have the right
  to give any explanation relevant to the charges
  made against him but he cannot make an appeal.
• Article 19 The tribunal shall not be bound by
  the technical rules of evidence. The tribunal may
  admit any evidence which it deems to be of
  probative value
• Article 26 The judgments of the Tribunal shall
  be final and are not subject to any future
  review.

12
The Legitimacy of the Trials

• What made the trials illegitimate?
• Crimes defined after they were committed
• Victors justice
• Same rules did not apply to Allies (eg.
  Nazi-Soviet Pact, bombing of Germany, Katyn, etc)
  therefore, double standards