“IN a world where good and evil are considered antiquated ideas and where the concept of right and wrong is vague and subjective, Nuremberg helped to define what is acceptable conduct in … war and what is not.” (Telford Taylor Papers, Columbia University Law School, New York, May 9, 1949)
The sordid lessons of mankind’s history (particularly, at the end of World War II) undeniably prove that man’s capacity for evil knows no boundaries.
Before World War II, more than 9 million Jews lived in Europe (most in Eastern Europe and Germany). By 1945, however, two-thirds had died and that final toll was even uncertain.
It was only at the end of the war—that is, when the journalists accompanied the troops liberating Auschwitz and Buchenwald—when the full horror was discovered. (Wood and Ail, 2018)
The shocking acts of the Nazis cannot be simply consigned to history. After all, one of the commonly accepted sanctions of the laws of war is “punishment of war criminals.” (Cruz, 2005)
Leading the world community to pledge that “never again” would anything similar to occur and intending to block repetition of the many horrors of World War II, the United Nations Charter—in its Preamble—seeks, among others, “[t]o save the succeeding generations from the scourge of war which … has brought untold sorrow to mankind.” (Ibid.)
Unquestionably, there is a need for a tribunal that will both enforce International Criminal Law to rein in impunity for the perpetration of atrocities and punish criminals who committed international crimes or violations of the laws of war (now considered under what is known as International Humanitarian Law). (Bernas, 2019)
The First International Criminal Tribunal
Germany, after World War II, was a nation in denial. Although the German people were free to rebuild their lives after the war, many resented the occupying forces and they made their feelings clear. Few blamed Hitler and his ilk for having brought the situation upon them—and fewer still were willing to believe the stories of mass murder. Many of them even told themselves that such stories were merely Allied propaganda and even looked up to the Nazi leaders as martyrs. (Roland, 2012)
With the end of World War II, the victorious Allies found it difficult to assemble enough Nazi figureheads to fill a courtroom and bring to justice the major Nazi war criminals, namely: Hermann Goering, Rudolf Hess, Joachim von Ribbentrop, Wilhelm Keitel, among others. (Adolf Hitler had committed suicide in his bunker, while two of his most notorious henchmen, Propaganda Minister Joseph Goebbels and SS Reichsfuhrer Heinrich Himmler had followed his example. On the other hand, Nazi officials Adolf Eichmann and Gestapo Chief Heinrich Mueller and Dr. Josef Mengele had fled to South America.) (Ibid.)
The International Military Tribunal at Nuremberg, Germany (or “The Nuremberg Tribunal”), the first international criminal tribunal, was established by the Allied Powers (through the London Agreement of August 8, 1945) for the prosecution and punishment of the major War Criminals of the European Axis—or to try the Nazi war criminals at the end of the World War II in 1945. (Funa, 2010)
The Nuremberg Tribunal was designed to document and redress crimes committed in the course of the most massive conflict the world has ever known.
In October 1945, the Tribunal formally indicted the Nuremberg defendants on four counts: crimes against peace, war crimes, crimes against humanity, and conspiracy to commit these crimes. (http://www.ushmmm.org) And, after the trials, twelve (12) prominent Nazis were sentenced to death.
Held for the purpose of bringing Nazi war criminals to justice (and in a way pursuing justice for the victims of the murderous mentality of the Nazi minions), the Nuremberg trials were a series of 13 trials conducted between 1945 and 1949. (www.history.com) Judges from the Allied Powers—Great Britain, France, the Soviet Union, and the United States—presided over the hearing of 22 major Nazi criminals. (http://www.ushmmm.org) (TO BE CONTINUED)
