The Nuremberg trials were an international protest against Nazism. Nuremberg Trials

Organization of the tribunal

In 1942, British Prime Minister Churchill declared that the Nazi elite should be executed without trial. He expressed this opinion more than once in the future. When Churchill tried to impose his opinion on Stalin, Stalin objected: “Whatever happens, it must be ... an appropriate court decision. Otherwise, people will say that Churchill, Roosevelt and Stalin simply took revenge on their political enemies!” Roosevelt, hearing that Stalin insisted on a trial, in turn declared that the trial procedure should not be “too legal”.

The requirement to create an International Military Tribunal was contained in the statement of the Soviet government of October 14, 1942 "On the responsibility of the Nazi invaders and their accomplices for the atrocities committed by them in the occupied countries of Europe."

The agreement on the establishment of the International Military Tribunal and its charter were developed by the USSR, the USA, Great Britain and France during the London conference, which took place from June 26 to August 8, 1945. The jointly developed document reflected the coordinated position of all 23 countries participating in the conference, the principles of the charter were approved by the UN General Assembly as universally recognized in the fight against crimes against humanity. On August 29, the first list of the main war criminals was published, consisting of 24 Nazi politicians, military men, ideologists of fascism.

List of defendants

In the initial list of defendants, the defendants were included in the following order:

1. Hermann Wilhelm Göring (ur. Hermann Wilhelm Göring listen)) Reichsmarschall, Commander-in-Chief of the German Air Force
2. Rudolf Hess (German) Rudolf Hess), Hitler's deputy for the leadership of the Nazi Party.
3. Joachim von Ribbentrop (ur. Ullrich Friedrich Willy Joachim von Ribbentrop ), Foreign Minister of Nazi Germany.
4. Wilhelm Keitel (ur. Wilhelm Keitel), chief of staff of the German High Command.
5. Robert Ley (German) Robert Ley), head of the Labor Front
6. Ernst Kaltenbrunner (ur. Ernst Kaltenbrunner), leader of the RSHA.
7. Alfred Rosenberg (ur. Alfred Rosenberg), one of the main ideologists of Nazism, Reich Minister for Eastern Territories.
8. Hans Frank (German) Dr. Hans Frank), head of the occupied Polish lands.
9. Wilhelm Frick (German) Wilhelm Frick), Minister of the Interior of the Reich.
10. Julius Streicher (ur. Julius Streicher), Gauleiter, editor-in-chief of the Sturmovik newspaper (German. Der Sturmer - Der Stürmer).
11. Walter Funk (ur. Walther Funk), Minister of Economy after Mine.
12. Hjalmar Schacht (ur. Hjalmar Schacht), the imperial minister of economics before the war.
13. Gustav Krupp von Bohlen und Halbach (ur. Gustav Krupp von Bohlen und Halbach ), head of the Friedrich Krupp concern.
14. Karl Dönitz (ur. Karl Donitz), Grand Admiral of the Fleet of the Third Reich, Commander-in-Chief of the German Navy, after the death of Hitler and in accordance with his posthumous will - President of Germany
15. Erich Raeder (ur. Erich Raeder), Commander-in-Chief of the Navy.
16. Baldur von Schirach (ur. Baldur Benedikt von Schirach), head of the Hitler Youth, Gauleiter of Vienna.
17. Fritz Sauckel (ur. Fritz Sauckel), leader of the forced deportations to the Reich of labor from the occupied territories.
18. Alfred Jodl (ur. Alfred Jodl), chief of staff of the operational leadership of the OKW
19. Martin Bormann (ur. Martin Bormann), the head of the party office, was accused in absentia.
20. Franz von Papen (ur. Franz Joseph Hermann Michael Maria von Papen ), Chancellor of Germany before Hitler, then ambassador to Austria and Turkey.
21. Arthur Seyss-Inquart (ur. Dr. Arthur Seyss-Inquart), chancellor of Austria, then imperial commissioner for occupied Holland.
22. Albert Speer (ur. Albert Speer), Imperial Minister of Armaments.
23. Konstantin von Neurath (ur. Konstantin Freiherr von Neurath ), in the early years of Hitler's reign, Minister of Foreign Affairs, then Viceroy in the Protectorate of Bohemia and Moravia.
24. Hans Fritsche (German) Hans Fritzche), head of the press and broadcasting department in the Propaganda Ministry.

Remarks to the accusation

The defendants were asked to write on it their attitude towards the prosecution. Raeder and Lay wrote nothing (Ley's response was, in fact, his suicide shortly after the charges were brought), while the rest of the defendants wrote the following:

1. Hermann Wilhelm Goering: "The winner is always the judge, and the loser is the accused!"
2. Rudolf Hess: "I don't regret anything"
3. Joachim von Ribbentrop: "The charges against the wrong people"
4. Wilhelm Keitel: "An order for a soldier - there is always an order!"
5. Ernst Kaltenbrunner: "I am not responsible for war crimes, I was only doing my duty as head of intelligence agencies, and I refuse to serve as a kind of Himmler's ersatz"
6. Alfred Rosenberg: "I reject the charge of 'conspiracy'. Anti-Semitism was only a necessary defensive measure.”
7. Hans Frank : "I regard this process as the highest court pleasing to God, designed to understand the terrible period of Hitler's reign and complete it"
8. Wilhelm Frick: "The whole accusation is based on the assumption of participation in a conspiracy"
9. Julius Streicher: "This trial is the triumph of world Jewry"
10. Hjalmar Schacht: "I don't understand at all why I'm charged"
11. Walter Funk: “Never in my life have I done anything consciously or unknowingly that would give rise to such accusations. If, out of ignorance or as a result of delusions, I committed the acts listed in the indictment, then my guilt should be considered from the perspective of my personal tragedy, but not as a crime.
12. Karl Dönitz: “None of the charges has anything to do with me. American inventions!
13. Baldur von Schirach: "All troubles come from racial politics"
14. Fritz Sauckel: "The gulf between the ideal of a socialist society nurtured and defended by me, a former sailor and worker, and these terrible events - the concentration camps - deeply shocked me"
15. Alfred Jodl: "The mixture of just accusations and political propaganda is regrettable"
16. Franz von Papen: “The accusation horrified me, firstly, by the realization of irresponsibility, as a result of which Germany was plunged into this war, which turned into a world catastrophe, and secondly, by the crimes that were committed by some of my compatriots. The latter are inexplicable from a psychological point of view. It seems to me that the years of godlessness and totalitarianism are to blame for everything. It was they who turned Hitler into a pathological liar."
17. Arthur Seyss-Inquart: "I would like to hope that this is the last act of the tragedy of the Second World War"
18. Albert Speer: “Process is necessary. Even an authoritarian state does not remove responsibility from each individual for the terrible crimes committed.
19. Konstantin von Neurath: "I have always been against accusations without a possible defense"
20. Hans Fritsche: “This is the worst accusation of all time. Only one thing can be more terrible: the coming accusation that the German people will bring against us for abusing their idealism.

Groups or organizations to which the defendants belonged were also accused.

Even before the start of the court hearings, after reading the indictment, on November 25, 1945, the head of the Labor Front, Robert Ley, committed suicide in the cell. Gustav Krupp was declared terminally ill by the medical board, and the case against him was dismissed pending trial.

The rest of the accused were put on trial.

Process progress

The International Military Tribunal was formed on an equal basis from representatives of the four great powers in accordance with the London Agreement.

Members of the tribunal

• from the United States: former Attorney General F. Biddle.
• from the USSR : Deputy Chairman of the Supreme Court Soviet Union Major General of Justice I. T. Nikitchenko.
• for the United Kingdom: Chief Justice, Lord Geoffrey Lawrence.
• from France: professor of criminal law A. Donnedier de Vabre.

Each of the 4 countries sent its chief accusers, their deputies and assistants:

• for the US: US Supreme Court Justice Robert Jackson.
• from the USSR: Prosecutor General of the Ukrainian SSR R. A. Rudenko.
• for Great Britain: Hartley Shawcross
• for France: François de Menthon, who was absent during the first days of the process and was replaced by Charles Dubost, and then Champentier de Ribes was appointed instead of de Menthon.

A total of 216 court hearings were held, the chairman of the court was the representative of the UK, J. Lawrence. Various evidences were presented, among them for the first time appeared the so-called. "secret protocols" to the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact (were presented by I. Ribbentrop's lawyer A. Seidl).

Due to the post-war aggravation of relations between the USSR and the West, the process was tense, this gave the accused hope for the collapse of the process. The situation escalated especially after Churchill's Fulton speech, when the real possibility of a war against the USSR arose. Therefore, the defendants behaved boldly, skillfully playing for time, hoping that the coming war would put an end to the process (Goering contributed most of all to this). At the end of the process, the USSR prosecution provided a film about the concentration camps of Majdanek, Sachsenhausen, Auschwitz, filmed by front-line cameramen of the Soviet army.

accusations

1. Nazi party plans:
   • The use of Nazi control for aggression against foreign states.
   • Aggressive actions against Austria and Czechoslovakia.
   • Attack on Poland.
   • Aggressive war against the whole world (-).
   • German invasion of the USSR in violation of the non-aggression pact of August 23, 1939.
   • Cooperation with Italy and Japan and aggressive war against the USA (November 1936 - December 1941).
2. Crimes against the world:
   • « All the accused and various other persons, for a number of years up to May 8, 1945, participated in the planning, preparation, initiation and conduct of aggressive wars, which were also wars in violation of international treaties, agreements and obligations.».
3. War crimes:
   • Killings and ill-treatment of the civilian population in the occupied territories and on the high seas.
   • Withdrawal of the civilian population of the occupied territories into slavery and for other purposes.
   • Murder and ill-treatment of prisoners of war and military personnel of countries with which Germany was at war, as well as with persons who were sailing on the high seas.
   • Aimless destruction of cities and towns and villages, devastation, not justified military necessity.
   • Germanization of the occupied territories.
4. Crimes against humanity:
   • The accused pursued a policy of persecution, repression and extermination of enemies of the Nazi government. The Nazis threw people into prison without a trial, subjected them to persecution, humiliation, enslavement, torture, and killed them.

Hitler did not take all responsibility with him to the grave. All guilt is not wrapped in Himmler's shroud. These living have chosen these dead to be their accomplices in this grandiose brotherhood of conspirators, and for the crime they committed together, each of them must pay.

It can be said that Hitler committed his last crime against the country he ruled. He was a mad messiah who started a war for no reason and continued it pointlessly. If he could no longer rule, then he did not care what would happen to Germany ...

They stand before this court, as blood-stained Gloucester stood before the body of his slain king. He begged the widow, as they beg you: "Say that I didn't kill them." And the queen answered: “Then say that they are not killed. But they are dead." If you say that these people are innocent, it's like saying that there was no war, no dead, no crime.

From the indictment of Robert Jackson

Sentence

International Military Tribunal sentenced:

• To death by hanging: Goering, Ribbentrop, Kaitel, Kaltenbrunner, Rosenberg, Frank, Frick, Streicher, Sauckel, Seyss-Inquart, Bormann (in absentia), Jodl.
• To life imprisonment: Hess, Funk, Raeder.
• By 20 years in prison: Schirach, Speer.
• By 15 years in prison: Neurath.
• By 10 years in prison: Dönitz.
• Justified: Fritsche, Papen, Schacht

The Soviet judge I. T. Nikitchenko filed a dissenting opinion, where he objected to the acquittal of Fritsche, Papen and Schacht, the non-recognition of the German cabinet of ministers, the General Staff and the supreme command of criminal organizations, as well as life imprisonment (not the death penalty) for Rudolf Hess.

Jodl was fully acquitted posthumously when the case was retried by a Munich court in 1953, but later, under pressure from the United States, the decision to annul the verdict of the Nuremberg court was annulled.

The Tribunal declared the SS, SD, SA, Gestapo and leadership of the Nazi Party to be criminal organizations.

A number of convicts petitioned the Allied Control Commission for Germany: Goering, Hess, Ribbentrop, Sauckel, Jodl, Keitel, Seyss-Inquart, Funk, Doenitz and Neurath - for pardon; Raeder - on the replacement of life imprisonment with the death penalty; Goering, Jodl and Keitel - about replacing hanging with execution if the request for pardon is not granted. All of these applications were denied.

The death penalty was carried out on the night of October 16, 1946 in the gymnasium of the Nuremberg prison. Goering poisoned himself in prison shortly before his execution (there is an assumption that the capsule with poison was given to him by his wife during the last meeting with a kiss).

Trials of smaller war criminals continued in Nuremberg until the 1950s (see Subsequent Nuremberg Trials), not in the International Tribunal, but in an American court.

On August 15, 1946, the American Information Administration published a survey of surveys conducted, according to which the overwhelming majority of Germans (about 80 percent) considered the Nuremberg trials fair, and the guilt of the defendants was undeniable; about half of the respondents answered that the defendants should be sentenced to death; only four percent responded negatively to the process.

Execution and cremation of the bodies of convicts

One of the witnesses to the execution, the writer Boris Polevoy, published his memoirs and impressions of the execution. The verdict was carried out by the American sergeant John Wood - "of his own free will."

I'm going to the gallows most of of them tried to appear brave. Some behaved defiantly, others resigned themselves to their fate, but there were also those who appealed to God's mercy. All but Rosenberg made brief last-minute announcements. And only Julius Streicher mentioned Hitler. In the gym, where 3 days ago the American guards played basketball, there were three black gallows, of which two were used. They hung one by one, but in order to finish sooner, the next Nazi was brought into the hall when the previous one was still hanging on the gallows.

The condemned climbed 13 wooden steps to an 8-foot-high platform. Ropes hung from beams supported by two poles. The hanged man fell into the interior of the gallows, the bottom of which on one side was hung with dark curtains, and on three sides it was lined with wood so that no one could see the death throes of the hanged.

After the execution of the last convict (Seiss-Inquart), a stretcher with the body of Goering was brought into the hall so that he would take a symbolic place under the gallows, and also so that journalists would be convinced of his death.

After the execution, the bodies of the hanged and the corpse of the suicide Goering were placed in a row. “Representatives of all the allied powers,” wrote one of the Soviet journalists, “examined them and signed on the death certificates. Photographs were taken of each body, dressed and naked. Then each corpse was wrapped in a mattress, along with the last clothes that he was wearing, and rope, on which he was hanged, and put in a coffin. All the coffins were sealed. While they were managing the rest of the bodies, Goering's body was brought on a stretcher, covered with an army blanket ... At 4 o'clock in the morning, the coffins were loaded into 2.5-ton trucks, waiting in the prison yard, covered with a waterproof tarpaulin and driven away, accompanied by a military escort. An American captain rode in the front car, followed by French and American generals. Then followed trucks and a jeep guarding them with specially selected soldiers and a machine gun. The convoy drove through Nuremberg and , leaving the city, took the direction to the south.

At dawn, they drove up to Munich and immediately headed to the outskirts of the city to the crematorium, the owner of which was warned about the arrival of the corpses of "fourteen american soldiers". In fact, there were only eleven corpses, but they said so in order to lull the possible suspicions of the crematorium personnel. The crematorium was surrounded, radio contact was established with the soldiers and tankers of the cordon in case of any alarm. Anyone who entered the crematorium was not allowed to go back until the end of the day. The coffins were opened, and the bodies checked by the American, British, French, and Soviet officers present at the execution to make sure they hadn't been switched along the way. After that, the cremation began immediately and continued throughout the day. When this matter was also finished, a car drove up to the crematorium, and a container with ashes was placed in it. The ashes were scattered from the plane into the wind.

Conclusion

By indicting the chief Nazi criminals, The International Military Tribunal recognized aggression as the gravest crime international character. The Nuremberg Trials are sometimes referred to as " By the court of history", as he had a significant impact on the final defeat of Nazism. Funk and Raeder, sentenced to life imprisonment, were pardoned in 1957. After Speer and Schirach were released in 1966, only Hess remained in prison. The right-wing forces of Germany repeatedly demanded that he be pardoned, but the victorious powers refused to commute the sentence. On August 17, 1987, Hess was found hanged in a gazebo in the prison yard.

The Nuremberg trials are dedicated to the American film "Nuremberg" ( Nuremberg) ().

At the trial in Nuremberg, I said: “If Hitler had friends, I would be his friend. I owe him the inspiration and glory of my youth, as well as later horror and guilt.

In the image of Hitler, as he was in relation to me and others, you can catch some pretty features. There is also the impression of a person who is in many ways gifted and selfless. But the longer I wrote, the more I felt that it was about superficial qualities.

Because such impressions are countered by an unforgettable lesson: the Nuremberg Trials. I will never forget one photographic document depicting a Jewish family going to their death: a man with his wife and his children on their way to death. He still stands before my eyes today.

In Nuremberg I was sentenced to twenty years in prison. The verdict of the military tribunal, however imperfectly portrayed history, tried to formulate guilt. Punishment, always ill-suited to measure historical responsibility, put an end to my civil existence. And that photo took my life from the ground. It turned out to be more durable than the sentence.

Museum

Currently, the meeting room ("Room 600"), where the Nuremberg trials took place, is the usual working premises of the Nuremberg Regional Court (address: Bärenschanzstraße 72, Nürnberg). However, on weekends there are guided tours (from 13:00 to 16:00 every day). In addition, the Documentation Center for the History of the Nazi Congresses in Nuremberg has a special exhibition dedicated to the Nuremberg trials. This new museum (opened November 4th) also has audio guides in Russian.

Notes

Literature

• Gilbert G. M. Nuremberg diary. The process through the eyes of a psychologist / transl. with him. A. L. Utkina. - Smolensk: Rusich, 2004. - 608 pages. ISBN 5-8138-0567-2

see also

• The Nuremberg Trials is a feature film by Stanley Kramer (1961).
• The Nuremberg Alarm is a 2008 two-part documentary film based on the book by Alexander Zvyagintsev.

On August 8, 1945, three months after the Victory over Nazi Germany, the governments of the USSR, the USA, Great Britain and France signed an agreement on the organization of the trial of the main war criminals. This decision caused an approving response all over the world: it was necessary to give a harsh lesson to the authors and executors of the cannibalistic plans for world domination, mass terror and murder, sinister ideas of racial superiority, genocide, monstrous destruction, robbery of vast territories. Subsequently, 19 more states officially joined the agreement, and the Tribunal became with full right to be called the Court of Nations.

The process began on November 20, 1945 and lasted almost 11 months. 24 war criminals who were members of the top leadership of Nazi Germany appeared before the Tribunal. This has never happened before in history. Also, for the first time, the issue of criminalizing a number of political and state institutions- the leadership of the fascist party NSDAP, its assault (SA) and security (SS) detachments, the security service (SD), the secret state police (Gestapo), the government cabinet, the High Command and the General Staff.

The trial was not a quick reprisal against a defeated enemy. indictment for German was handed over to the defendants 30 days before the start of the trial, and then they were given copies of all documentary evidence. Procedural guarantees gave the accused the right to defend themselves personally or with the help of a lawyer from among German lawyers, to petition for the call of witnesses, to provide evidence in their defense, to give explanations, to interrogate witnesses, etc.

Hundreds of witnesses were interrogated in the courtroom and in the field, thousands of documents were considered. Books, articles and public performance Nazi leaders, photographs, documentaries, newsreels. The credibility and persuasiveness of this base was not in doubt.

All 403 sessions of the Tribunal were public. About 60,000 passes were issued to the courtroom. The work of the Tribunal was widely covered by the press and broadcast live.

“Immediately after the war, people were skeptical about the Nuremberg trials (meaning the Germans),” the deputy chairman of the Supreme Court of Bavaria, Mr. Ewald Berschmidt, told me in the summer of 2005, giving an interview to the film crew who were then working on the film “Nuremberg Alarm”. - It was still a trial of the victors over the vanquished. The Germans expected revenge, but not necessarily the triumph of justice. However, the lessons of the process were different. The judges carefully considered all the circumstances of the case, they searched for the truth. Those responsible were sentenced to death. Whose fault was less - received other punishments. Some have even been acquitted. The Nuremberg trials set a precedent international law. His main lesson was equality before the law for everyone - both for generals and for politicians.

September 30-October 1, 1946 The Court of Nations delivered its verdict. The defendants were found guilty of grave crimes against peace and humanity. Twelve of them were sentenced by the tribunal to death by hanging. Others were to serve life sentences or long prison terms. Three were acquitted.

The main links of the state-political machine, brought by the fascists to a diabolical ideal, were declared criminal. However, the government, the High Command, the General Staff and the assault detachments (SA), contrary to the opinion of the Soviet representatives, were not recognized as such. I. T. Nikitchenko, a member of the International Military Tribunal from the USSR, did not agree with this exemption (except for the SA), as well as with the justification of the three accused. He also rated Hess as a lenient sentence of life imprisonment. The Soviet judge set out his objections in a Special Opinion. It was read out in court and forms part of the verdict.

Yes, there were serious disagreements among the judges of the Tribunal on certain issues. However, they cannot be compared with the confrontation of views on the same events and persons, which will unfold in the future.

But first about the main thing. The Nuremberg trials acquired world-historical significance as the first and to this day the largest legal act of the United Nations. United in their rejection of violence against a person and the state, the peoples of the world have proved that they can successfully resist universal evil and administer fair justice.

The bitter experience of World War II made everyone take a fresh look at many of the problems facing humanity and understand that every person on Earth is responsible for the present and the future. The fact that the Nuremberg trials took place shows that the leaders of the states do not dare to ignore the firmly expressed will of the peoples and stoop to double standards.

It seemed that brilliant prospects for a collective and peaceful solution of problems for a bright future without wars and violence opened up before all countries.

But, unfortunately, humanity forgets the lessons of the past too quickly. Shortly after the famous Fulton speech of Winston Churchill, despite convincing collective action at Nuremberg, the victorious powers were divided into military-political blocs, and the work of the United Nations has been complicated by political strife. The shadow of the Cold War has descended over the world for many decades.

Under these conditions, forces were activated that wanted to revise the results of the Second World War, belittle and even nullify the leading role of the Soviet Union in the defeat of fascism, put an equal sign between Germany, the aggressor country, and the USSR, which waged a just war and saved the world at the cost of huge sacrifices. from the horrors of Nazism. 26 million 600 thousand of our compatriots died in this bloody massacre. And more than half of them - 15 million 400 thousand - were civilians.

The chief prosecutor at the Nuremberg trials from the USSR Roman Rudenko speaks at the Palace of Justice. November 20, 1945, Germany

There was a mass of publications, films, television programs that distort historical reality. In the "works" of the former brave Nazis and other numerous authors, the leaders of the Third Reich are whitewashed, or even glorified, and Soviet military leaders are denigrated - without regard to the truth and the actual course of events. In their version, the Nuremberg trials and the prosecution of war criminals in general are just an act of revenge on the vanquished by the victors. At the same time, a typical trick is used - to show famous fascists at the everyday level: look, these are the most ordinary and even nice people, and not at all executioners and sadists.

For example, Reichsführer SS Himmler, the chief of the most sinister punitive organs, appears as a gentle nature, a supporter of the protection of animals, a loving father of a family who hates indecency against women.

Who was this "gentle" nature really? Here are the words of Himmler, spoken publicly: “... How the Russians feel, how the Czechs feel, I absolutely do not care. Whether other peoples live in prosperity or die of starvation interests me only insofar as we can use them as slaves for our culture, otherwise it makes absolutely no difference to me. Whether 10,000 Russian women will die of exhaustion during the construction of the anti-tank ditch or not, I am interested only insofar as this ditch must be built for Germany ... "

This is more like the truth. This is the truth itself. The revelations fully correspond to the image of the creator of the SS - the most perfect and sophisticated repressive organization, the creator of the concentration camp system, which terrifies people to this day.

Warm colors are found even for Hitler. In the fantastic volume of "Hitler studies" he is both a brave warrior of the First World War, and an artistic nature - an artist, a connoisseur of architecture, and a modest vegetarian, and an exemplary statesman. There is a point of view that if the Fuhrer of the German people ceased his activities in 1939 without starting a war, he would go down in history as greatest politician Germany, Europe, the world!

But is there a force capable of freeing Hitler from responsibility for the aggressive, most bloody and cruel world slaughter he unleashed? Of course, the positive role of the UN in the cause of post-war peace and cooperation is present, and it is absolutely indisputable. But there is no doubt that this role could be much more significant.

Fortunately, a global clash did not take place, but military blocs often teetered on the brink. There was no end to local conflicts. Small wars broke out with considerable casualties, in some countries terrorist regimes arose and established themselves.

The end of the confrontation between the blocs and the emergence in the 1990s. unipolar world order has not added the resources of the United Nations. Some political scientists even express, to put it mildly, a very controversial opinion that the UN in its current form is an outdated organization that corresponds to the realities of the Second World War, but by no means to today's requirements.

We have to admit that the recurrences of the past in many countries today are echoing more and more often. We live in a turbulent and unstable world, more and more fragile and vulnerable year by year. Contradictions between developed and other states are becoming more acute. Deep cracks appeared along the borders of cultures and civilizations.

A new, large-scale evil arose - terrorism, which quickly grew into an independent global force. It has many things in common with fascism, in particular, a deliberate disregard for international and domestic law, a complete disregard for morality, the value of human life. Unexpected, unpredictable attacks, cynicism and cruelty, mass casualties sow fear and horror in countries that seemed to be well protected from any threat.

In its most dangerous, international variety, this phenomenon is directed against the whole of civilization. Even today it poses a serious threat to the development of mankind. We need a new, firm, just word in the fight against this evil, similar to what the International Military Tribunal said to German fascism 65 years ago.

The successful experience of confronting aggression and terror during the Second World War is relevant to this day. Many approaches are applicable one to one, others need to be rethought and developed. However, you can draw your own conclusions. Time is a harsh judge. It is absolute. Being not determined by the actions of people, it does not forgive the disrespectful attitude to the verdicts that it has already issued once, whether it is a specific person or entire nations and states. Unfortunately, the arrows on its dial never show mankind the vector of movement, but, inexorably counting the moments, time willingly writes fatal letters to those who try to be familiar with it.

Yes, sometimes the not-so-uncompromising mother-history placed the implementation of the decisions of the Nuremberg Tribunal on the very weak shoulders of politicians. Therefore, it is not surprising that the brown hydra of fascism in many countries of the world has again raised its head, and the shamanistic apologists for terrorism are recruiting more and more proselytes into their ranks every day.

The activities of the International Military Tribunal are often referred to as the "Nuremberg Epilogue". With regard to the executed leaders of the Third Reich, disbanded criminal organizations, this metaphor is quite justified. But evil, as we see, turned out to be more tenacious than it seemed to many then, in 1945-1946, in the euphoria of the Great Victory. No one today can assert that freedom and democracy have established themselves in the world once and for all.

In this regard, the question arises: how much and what efforts are required to make specific conclusions from the experience of the Nuremberg trials that would translate into good deeds and become a prologue to the creation of a world order without wars and violence, based on real non-interference in the internal affairs of other states and peoples, as well as respect for the rights of the individual...

A.G. Zvyagintsev,

preface to the book main process humanity.
Reporting from the past. Appeal to the future»

Translation from of English language

Statement International Association prosecutors on occasion
70th Anniversary of the International Military Tribunal in Nuremberg

Today marks 70 years since the beginning of the work of the International Military Tribunal in Nuremberg, established to try the main war criminals of the countries of the European axis, the first meeting of which took place on November 20, 1945.

As a result of the well-coordinated work of a team of prosecutors from the four Allied Powers - the Soviet Union, Great Britain, the USA and France - 24 Nazi leaders were indicted, eighteen of whom were convicted on October 1, 1946 in accordance with the Charter.

The Nuremberg trials were a unique event in history. For the first time, state leaders were convicted of crimes against peace, war crimes and crimes against humanity. The "Court of Nations", as the Nuremberg Tribunal was called, severely condemned the Nazi regime, its institutions, officials and their practices and long years determined the vector of political and legal development.

The work of the International Military Tribunal and the Nuremberg Principles formulated at that time gave impetus to the development of international humanitarian and criminal law and contributed to the creation of other mechanisms of international criminal justice.

The Nuremberg principles remain in demand in today's globalized world, full of contradictions and conflicts that hinder peace and stability.

The International Association of Prosecutors supports Resolution A /RES /69/160 of 18 December 2014 General Assembly UN “Combating the glorification of Nazism, neo-Nazism and other practices that contribute to the escalation modern forms racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance”, in which, inter alia, calls on States take in accordance with international standards more effective measures to combat manifestations of Nazism and extremist movements that pose a real threat to democratic values.

The International Association of Prosecutors calls on its members and other prosecutors around the world take an active part in organizing and holding national and international events dedicated to the celebration of the 70th anniversary of the establishment of the International Military Tribunal in Nuremberg.

(Posted on November 20, 2015 on the website of the International Association of Prosecutors www. iap association. org ).

Statement

Coordinating Council of Prosecutors General

member states of the Commonwealth Independent States

on the occasion of the 70th anniversary of the International Military Tribunal in Nuremberg

This year marks the 70th anniversary of the sentencing of the International Military Tribunal at Nuremberg, established to try the main war criminals of Nazi Germany.

On August 8, 1945, an Agreement was signed in London between the governments of the USSR, the USA, Great Britain and France on the prosecution and punishment of the main war criminals of the European Axis countries, an integral part of which was the Charter of the International Military Tribunal. The first session of the Nuremberg Tribunal took place on November 20, 1945.

As a result of the well-coordinated work of prosecutors from the Soviet Union, Great Britain, the USA and France, on October 1, 1946, most of the accused were found guilty.

Soviet representatives, including employees of the USSR Prosecutor's Office, actively participated in the development of the Charter of the Nuremberg Tribunal, the preparation of the indictment, and at all stages of the process.

The Nuremberg trials were the first experience in history of condemning by an international court of crimes of a national scale - the criminal acts of the ruling regime of Nazi Germany, its punitive institutions, and a number of top political and military figures. He also gave a proper assessment of the criminal activities of Nazi accomplices.

The work of the International Military Tribunal serves not only as a vivid example of the triumph of international justice, but also as a reminder of the inevitability of responsibility for crimes against peace and humanity.

The "Court of Nations", as the Nuremberg Tribunal was called, had a significant impact on the subsequent political and legal development of mankind.

The principles he formulated gave impetus to the development of international humanitarian and criminal law, contributed to the creation of other mechanisms of international criminal justice and remain in demand in today's globalized world, full of contradictions and conflicts.

The attempts made in some countries to revise the results of the Second World War, the dismantling of monuments to Soviet soldiers, criminal prosecution veterans of the Great Patriotic War, the rehabilitation and glorification of accomplices of Nazism lead to the erosion of historical memory and carry a real threat of repetition of crimes against peace and humanity.

Coordinating Council of Prosecutors General of the States Members of the Commonwealth of Independent States:

Supports Resolution 70/139 of the UN General Assembly of December 17, 2015 “Combating the glorification of Nazism, neo-Nazism and other practices that contribute to the escalation of contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance”, which, in particular, expresses concern regarding the glorification in any form of the Nazi movement and neo-Nazism, including through the construction of monuments, memorials and public demonstrations, noting that such practices offend the memory of the countless victims of World War II and have a negative impact on children and youth, and calls States to strengthen their capacity to combat crimes motivated by racism and xenophobia, to fulfill their responsibility to bring perpetrators of such crimes to justice and fight impunity;

Considers important element professional and moral training of future generations of lawyers, including prosecutors, the study of the historical heritage of the Nuremberg trials.

(Published on September 7, 2016 on the website of the Coordinating Council of Prosecutors General of the CIS Member States www. ksgp-cis. en ).

Resolution of the UN General Assembly 70/139 of December 17, 2015 "Combating the glorification of Nazism, neo-Nazism and other practices that contribute to the escalation of contemporary forms of racism, racial discrimination, xenophobia and related intolerance"

At the Nuremberg Trials

The Nuremberg trials took place in Nuremberg (Germany) from November 20, 1945 to October 1, 1946

defendants

• G. Goering - Minister of Aviation in Nazi Germany. On court: "The winner is always the judge, and the loser is the accused!"
• R. Hess - SS Obergruppenführer, Hitler's deputy for the party, third person in the hierarchy of the Third Reich: "I don't regret anything"
• I. von Ribbentrop - Minister of Foreign Affairs of Germany: "The wrong people have been charged"
• W. Keitel - Chief of Staff of the Supreme High Command of the German Armed Forces: “An order for a soldier is always an order!”
• E. Kaltenbrunner - SS Obergruppenführer, head of the Imperial Security Main Office (RSHA): "I am not responsible for war crimes, I was only doing my duty as the head of the intelligence agencies, and I refuse to serve as a kind of Himmler's ersatz"
• A. Rosenberg - chief ideologue Third Reich, head of department foreign policy NSDAP, Fuhrer's Commissioner for Moral and Philosophical Education of the NSDAP: “I reject the accusation of a ‘conspiracy’. Anti-Semitism was only a necessary defensive measure.”
• G. Frank - Governor General of occupied Poland, Reich Minister of Justice of the Third Reich: “I view this trial as a God-pleasing supreme court to sort out and bring to an end the terrible period of Hitler’s rule.”
• V. Frick - Reich Minister of the Interior of Germany, Reich Protector of Bohemia and Moravia: "The whole accusation is based on the assumption of participation in a conspiracy"
• J. Streicher - Gauleiter of Franconia, ideologist of racism: "This process is"
• W. Funk - Minister of Economics of Germany, President of the Reichsbank: “Never in my life have I, either consciously or unknowingly, done anything that would give grounds for such accusations. If, out of ignorance or as a result of delusions, I committed the acts listed in the indictment, then my guilt should be considered from the perspective of my personal tragedy, but not as a crime.
• K. Dönitz - Grand Admiral, commander of the submarine fleet, commander in chief navy Nazi Germany: “None of the charges has anything to do with me. American inventions!
• E. Raeder - Grand Admiral, Commander-in-Chief of the Navy
• B. von Schirach - party and youth leader, Reichsugendführer, Gauleiter of Vienna, SA Obergruppenführer: "All troubles come from racial politics"
• F. Sauckel - one of the main responsible for organizing the use of forced labor in Nazi Germany, Gauleiter of Thuringia, SA Obergruppenführer, SS Obergruppenfuehrer: “The gulf between the ideal of a socialist society, hatched and defended by me, in the past a sailor and a worker, and these terrible events - concentration camps - deeply shocked me”
• A. Jodl - Chief of Staff of the Operational Command of the Wehrmacht High Command, Colonel General: "A regrettable mixture of just accusations and political propaganda"
• A. Seyss-Inquart - SS Obergruppenführer, minister without portfolio in Hitler's government, Reichskommissar of the Netherlands: “I would like to hope that this is the last act of the tragedy of the Second World War”
• A. Speer - Hitler's personal architect, Reich Minister of Armaments and Ammunition: “The process is necessary. Even an authoritarian state does not remove responsibility from each individual for the terrible crimes committed.
• K. von Neurath - German Foreign Minister and Reich Protector of Bohemia and Moravia (1939-1943), SS Obergruppenführer: "I have always been against accusations without a possible defense"
• G. Fritsche - Head of the Press and Broadcasting Department in the Ministry of Propaganda: “This is the worst accusation of all time. Only one thing can be more terrible: the coming accusation that the German people will bring against us for abusing their idealism.
• J. Schacht - Reich Minister of Economics (1936-1937), Reich Minister without portfolio (1937-1942), one of the main organizers of the war economy of Nazi Germany: “ I don't understand why I'm being charged."
• R. Ley (hung himself before the start of the process) - Reichsleiter, SA Obergruppenführer, head of the organizational department of the NSDAP, head of the German Labor Front
• G. Krupp (he was declared terminally ill, and his case was suspended) - industrialist and tycoon who provided significant material support to the Nazi movement
• M. Bormann (sued in absentia, because he disappeared and was not found) - SS Obergruppenführer, SA Standartenführer, personal secretary and close ally of Hitler
• F. von Papen - Chancellor of Germany before Hitler, then ambassador to Austria and Turkey: “The accusation horrified me, firstly, by the realization of irresponsibility, as a result of which Germany was plunged into this war, which turned into a world catastrophe, and secondly, by the crimes that were committed by some of my compatriots. The latter are inexplicable from a psychological point of view. It seems to me that the years of godlessness and totalitarianism are to blame for everything. It was they who turned Hitler into a pathological liar."

Judges

• Lord Justice Geoffrey Lawrence (Great Britain) - Chief Justice
• Iona Nikitchenko - Deputy Chairman of the Supreme Court of the Soviet Union Major General of Justice
• Francis Biddle - Former U.S. Attorney General
• Henri Donnedier de Vabre - Professor of Criminal Law of France

Chief accusers

• Roman Rudenko - Prosecutor General of the Ukrainian SSR
• Robert Jackson is a member of the federal supreme court USA
• Hartley Shawcross - British Attorney General
• Charles Dubost, Francois de Menthon, Champentier de Ribes (alternately) - representatives of France

Lawyers

During the trial, each defendant was represented by a lawyer of his own choice.

• Dr. Exner - professor of criminal law, defender of A. Jodl
• G. Yarrice is a specialist in international and constitutional law. government advocate
• Dr. R. Dix - head of the association of German lawyers, defender J. Shakht
• Dr. Kranzbüller - judge in the German Navy, defender of K. Dönitz
• O. Stammer - lawyer, defender of Goering
• And others

accusations

• crimes against peace: starting a war for the sake of establishing world domination of Germany
• war crimes: murder and torture of prisoners of war, deportation of the civilian population to Germany, murder of hostages, looting and destruction of cities and villages in occupied countries
• crimes against humanity: extermination, enslavement of the civilian population for political, racial, religious reasons

Sentence

• Goering, Ribbentrop, Keitel, Kaltenbrunner, Rosenberg, Frank, Frick, Streicher, Sauckel, Seyss-Inquart, Bormann (in absentia), Jodl - the death penalty by hanging
• Hess, Funk, Raeder - life imprisonment
• Schirach, Speer - 20 years in prison
• Neurath - 15 years in prison
• Dönitz - 10 years in prison
• Fritsche, Papen, Schacht - acquitted

The state organizations of Germany, the SS, SD, Gestapo and the leadership of the Nazi Party, were also recognized as criminal by the court.

Chronicle of the Nuremberg Trials, Briefly

• 1942, October 14 - the statement of the Soviet government: "... considers it necessary to immediately bring to trial a special international tribunal and punish any of the leaders of fascist Germany to the fullest extent of the criminal law ..."
• 1943, November 1 - the protocol of the Moscow Conference of the Ministers of Foreign Affairs of the USSR, the USA and Great Britain was signed, the 18th paragraph of which was the "Declaration on the responsibility of the Nazis for the atrocities committed"
• 1943, November 2 - "Declaration on the responsibility of the Nazis for the atrocities committed" was published in "Pravda"
• 1945, May 31-June 4 - Conference of Experts in London on the Punishment of Axis War Criminals, which was attended by representatives of 16 countries participating in the work of the United Nations War Crimes Commission
• 1945, August 8 - in London, the signing of an agreement between the governments of the USSR, the USA, Great Britain and France on the prosecution and punishment of major war criminals, according to which the International Military Tribunal was established.
• 1945, August 29 - a list of the main war criminals was published, consisting of 24 names
• 1945, October 18 - the indictment was served on the International Military Tribunal and transmitted through its secretariat to each of the accused
• 1945, November 20 - the beginning of the process
• 1945, November 25 - the head of the Labor Front, Robert Ley, committed suicide in a cell
• 1945, November 29 - demonstration during the meeting of the tribunal documentary film"Concentration camps", which included German newsreel footage filmed in the Auschwitz camp, Buchenwald, Dachau
• 1945, December 17 - at a closed session, the judges expressed bewilderment to Streicher's lawyer, Dr. Marx, about the fact that he refused to satisfy the client's request to summon some witnesses to the trial, in particular the defendant's wife
• 1946, January 5 - Gestapo lawyer Dr. Merkel petitions for ... a postponement of the process, but does not receive support
• 1946, March 16 - interrogation of Goering, he confessed to minor crimes, but denied his involvement in the main charges
• 1946, August 15 - The American Information Administration published a survey of polls, according to which about 80 percent of Germans considered the Nuremberg trials fair, and the guilt of the defendants was undeniable
• 1946, October 1 - verdict on the accused
• April 11, 1946 - During interrogation, Kaltenbruner denies his knowledge of what was happening in the death camps: “I have nothing to do with this. I did not give orders, nor did I execute other people's orders on this matter.
• 1946, October 15 - the head of the prison, Colonel Andrews, announced to the convicts the results of the consideration of their applications, at 22 hours 45 minutes Goering, sentenced to death, poisoned himself
• 1946, October 16 - execution of criminals sentenced to death

The Nuremberg trials (international military tribunal) - the trial of the leaders of Nazi Germany following the results of the Second World War. The process took place from November 20, 1945 to October 1, 1946, 10 months. Within the framework of the international tribunal, the victorious countries (USSR, USA, England and France) accused the leaders of Nazi Germany for war and other crimes committed by the latter from 1939 to 1945.

Creation of an international tribunal

The International Tribunal for the Trial of German War Criminals was formed on 8 August 1945 in London. Agreements between the USSR, the USA, Great Britain and France were signed there. The agreement was based on the principles of the UN (United Nations Organization) and the parties have repeatedly emphasized this, including in the Agreement itself.

1. The Tribunal will be held in Germany.
2. The organization, jurisdiction and functions are separately created for the tribunal.
3. Each of the countries undertakes to present at the tribunal all important war criminals who are in their captivity.
4. The signed agreements do not cancel the Moscow Declaration of 1943. Let me remind you that according to the declaration of 1943, all war criminals were to be returned to those settlements where they committed their atrocities, and there they were tried.
5. Any member of the UN may join the charge.
6. The agreement does not cancel other courts that have already been created or will be created in the future.
7. The agreement comes into force from the moment of signing and valid for 1 year.

It was on this basis that the Nuremberg Trials were created.

Preparing for the process

Before starting the Nuremberg Trials, 2 meetings were held in Berlin, where organizational issues were discussed. The first meeting was held on October 9 in the building of the Control Council in Berlin. Minor issues were raised here - the uniform of judges, the organization of translation into 4 languages, the format of the defense, and so on. The second meeting was held on October 18 in the same building of the Control Council. This meeting, unlike the first, was open.

The International Military Tribunal in Berlin was convened to pass the indictment. This was announced by the chairman of the meeting, Major General of Justice I.T. Nikitchenko. The indictment was directed against the high command of the Wehrmacht, as well as against the organizations controlled by it: the government, the leadership of the party, the guard detachments of the SS party, the security service of the SD party, the Gestapo (secret police), the assault detachments of the SA party, the general staff and the high command of the German army. The charges were brought against the following persons: Göring, Hess, Ribbentrop, Ley, Keitel, Kaltenbrunner, Funk, Schacht, Rosenberg, Frank, Frick, Streicher, Krupp, Bohlen, Halbach, Doenitz, Raeder, Schirach, Sauckel, Jodl, Bormann, Papen, Seiss-Inkwrt, Speer, Neurath and Fritsche.

The accusations of the Nuremberg Tribunal consisted of 4 main points:

1. Conspiracy to seize power in Germany.
2. War crimes.
3. Crimes against humanity.

Each of the charges is extensive, so it must be considered separately.

Conspiracy to seize power

The accused were charged with the fact that they were all members of the National Socialist Party, participated in a conspiracy to seize power, realizing the consequences to which this would lead.

The party created 4 postulates, which became the basis of the conspiracy. These postulates made it possible to control the entire German public by means of imposing doctrines on them - the superiority of the German race (Aryans), the need for war for justice, the full power of the "Fuhrer", as the only person worthy to govern Germany. Actually, Germany grew up on these doctrines, which kept Europe at war for 6 years.

Further accusations of this paragraph concern the establishment of total control over all spheres of the life of the German state, with the help of which military aggression became possible.

These crimes are related to the unleashing of wars:

• September 1, 1939 - against Poland
• September 3, 1939 - against France and Great Britain
• April 9, 1940 - against Denmark and Norway
• May 10, 1940 - against the Benelux countries
• April 6, 1941 - against Greece and Yugoslavia
• April 22, 1941 - against the USSR
• December 11, 1941 - against the USA

Here's a nuance that draws attention. Above are 7 dates on which the international tribunal accused Germany of starting wars. There are no questions about 5 of them - these days wars really started against these states, but which wars were started on September 3, 1939 and December 11, 1941? On what sector of the front did the German military command (which was tried in Nuremberg) start the war on September 3, 1939 against England and France, and on December 11, 1941 against the USA? Here we are dealing with a substitution of concepts. In fact, Germany unleashed a war with Poland, for which on September 3, 1939, England and France declared war on her. And on December 11, 1941, the United States declares war on Germany after the latter has already fought with a huge number of countries (including the USSR) and after Pearl Harbar, which was committed by the Japanese, not the Germans.

War crimes

The leadership of Nazi Germany was accused of the following war crimes:

• Murder and mistreatment of civilians. It is enough to cite only the figures that, according to the indictment, in the USSR alone, this crime by Germany affected about 3 million people.
• Theft of the civilian population into slavery. The charge refers to 5 million citizens of the USSR, 750 thousand citizens of Czechoslovakia, about 1.5 million French, 500 thousand Dutch, 190 thousand Belgians, 6 thousand Luxembourgers, 5.2 thousand Danes.
• Murder and ill-treatment of prisoners of war.
• Hostage killing. We are talking about thousands of people killed.
• Collective fines. This system was used by Germany in many countries, but not in the USSR. Collective responsibility involved the payment of a fine by the entire population for the actions of individuals. It would seem not the most important article of the charge, but during the war years, collective fines were issued in the amount of more than 1.1 trillion francs.
• Theft of private and public property. The statement of the Nuremberg Tribunal states that as a result of the theft of private and public property, the damage to France amounted to 632 trillion francs, Belgium - 175 billion Belgian francs, the USSR - 679 trillion rubles, Czechoslovakia - 200 trillion Czechoslovak crowns.
• Aimless destruction, not due to military necessity. We are talking about the destruction of cities, villages, settlements and so on.
• Forced recruitment of labor force. First of all among the civilian population. For example, during the period from 1942 to 1944 in France, 963 thousand people were forcibly turned to work in Germany. Another 637,000 Frenchmen worked for the German army in France. Data for other countries are not specified in the charge. It is only about the huge number of prisoners in the USSR.
• Compulsion to swear allegiance to a foreign state.

Defendants and accusations

The participants were accused of helping the Nazis rise to power, strengthening their order in Germany, preparing for war, war crimes, crimes against humanity, including crimes against individuals. This is what everyone was accused of. There were additional accusations for each. They are presented in the table below.

* - In addition to the above.

This is the complete list according to which the Nuremberg trials accused the top of Nazi Germany.

The case of Martin Bormann was considered in absentia. Krupp, who was recognized as ill, could not be taken to the court room, as a result of which the case was suspended. Lei committed suicide on October 26, 1945 - the case was closed due to the death of the suspect.

At the interrogation of the defendants on November 20, 1945, everyone pleaded not guilty, saying something like the following words: "I do not plead guilty in the sense that the charge is brought." A very ambiguous answer ... But the best answer to the question of guilt was Rudolf Hess, who said - I plead guilty before God.

Judges

The Nuremberg trials had the following composition of judges:

• From the USSR - Nikitchenko Ion Timofeevich, his deputy - Volchkov Alexander Fedorovich.
• From the USA - Francis Biddle, his deputy - John Parker.
• From the United Kingdom - Jeffrey Lawrence, his deputy - Norman Birkett.
• From the French Republic - Henri Donnedier de Vabre, his deputy - Robert Falco.

Sentence

The Nuremberg Tribunal ended with a judgment on 1 October 1946. According to the verdict, 11 people will be hanged, 6 will go to prison and 3 will be acquitted.

Double standards of process

I propose to turn off emotions (this is hard, but necessary) and think about this - Germany was judged by the USA, the USSR, England and France. The list of accusations was higher in the text. But the real problem was that the tribunal used double standarts- what the Allies accused Germany of, they themselves did! Not all, of course, but a lot. Examples of accusations:

• Poor treatment of prisoners of war. But the same France used German captured soldiers for forced labor. France treated the captured Germans so cruelly that the US even took some of the prisoners from them and sent protests.
• Forced deportation of the civilian population. But in 1945, the US and the USSR agreed to deport more than 10 million Germans from eastern and central Europe.
• Planning, unleashing and waging aggressive war. But in 1939 the USSR does the same with respect to Finland.
• Destruction of civilian objects (cities and villages). But on account of England, hundreds of bombings of peaceful cities in Germany with the use of vortex bombs to cause maximum damage to buildings.
• Looting and economic losses. But we all remember well the famous "2 days to plunder" that all allied armies had.

This best emphasizes the duality of standards. This is neither good nor bad. There was a war, and terrible things always happen in war. It's just that in Nuremberg there was a situation that completely refuted the system of international law: the winner condemned the vanquished, and the sentences of "guilty" were known in advance. In this case, everything is considered from one side.

Is everyone condemned?

The Nuremberg trial today raises more questions than it answers. One of the main questions - who should be tried for cruelty and war? Before answering this question, I want to recall Keitel's last words at the Nuremberg Trials. He said that he was sorry that he, a soldier, was used for such purposes. Here's what the President of the Court had to say.

A command order, even if given to a soldier, cannot and should not be blindly followed if it requires the commission of such cruel and large-scale crimes without military necessity.

From the speech of the accuser

It turns out that any person who carried out criminal orders should have been brought before an international court. But then it should be German generals, officers and soldiers, concentration camp employees, doctors who conducted inhuman experiments on prisoners, generals of all countries that took part in the war against the USSR on the side of Germany, and others. But no one judged them ... In this regard, there are 2 questions:

• Why were Germany's allies, Italy and Japan, not attached to the court?
• Troops and generals from following countries: Bulgaria, Romania, Hungary, Austria, Denmark, Holland, Belgium. Why were the representatives of these countries and the military who took part in the war not convicted?

Undoubtedly, representatives of both categories cannot be convicted of Nazis coming to power in Germany, but they must be convicted of war crimes and crimes against humanity. After all, the Nuremberg trials accused the German army of this, the armies of the countries indicated above were an integral part of it.

What was the process for?

The Nuremberg trials today call great amount questions, the main of which is why this process was needed at all? Historians answer - for the triumph of justice, so that all those responsible for the world war and those who have blood on their hands are punished. beautiful phrase but it is very easy to disprove it. If the allies were looking for justice, then not only the top of Germany, but also Italy, Japan, the generals of Romania, Austria, Hungary, Belgium, Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, Slovakia, Denmark and other countries that took an active part in the German European war should have been judged in Nuremberg .

I will give an example with Moldova, which was on the border, and the blow to which fell on the first days of the war. The Germans attacked here, but they very quickly began to move inland, followed by the Romanian army. And when they talk about the atrocities of the Germans in Moldova during the war, then 90% of these are the atrocities of the Romanians, who staged the genocide of the Moldovans. Shouldn't these people be held accountable for their crimes?

I see only 2 reasonable explanations why the international tribunal over Germany took place:

1. We needed one country on which to hang all the sins of the war. Burning through Germany was the best fit for this.
2. Should have shifted the blame to specific people. These people were found - the leadership of Nazi Germany. It turned out to be a paradox. For a 6-year world war with tens of millions of dead, 10-15 people are to blame. Of course it wasn't...

The Nuremberg trials summed up the Second World War. He identified the perpetrators and the degree of their guilt. On this page of history was turned over, and no one seriously dealt with the questions of how Hitler came to power, how he reached the borders of Poland without firing a shot, and others.

After all, neither before nor after that, a tribunal was never arranged over the vanquished.

France is a winning country

The Nuremberg trials recorded that 4 countries won the war: the USSR, the USA, England and France. It was these 4 countries that judged Germany. If there are no questions about the USSR, the USA and England, then there are questions about France. Can it be called a winner country? If a country wins a war, then it must have victories. The USSR passes from Moscow to Berlin in 4 years, England helps the USSR, fights at sea and bombs the enemy, the USA is known from Normandy, but what about France?

In 1940, Hitler quite easily defeats her army, after which he arranges a famous dance near eiffel tower. After that, the French begin to work for the Wehrmacht, including in military terms. But the most significant is something else. After the end of the war, 2 conferences were held (Crimean and Berlin), at which the winners discussed the post-war life and the fate of Germany. At both conferences there were only 3 countries: the USSR, the USA and England.

The initial list of defendants included:

1. Hermann Wilhelm Goering, Reichsmarschall, Commander-in-Chief of the German Air Force.

2. Rudolf Hess, Hitler's deputy in charge of the Nazi Party.

3. Joachim von Ribbentrop, Foreign Minister of Nazi Germany.

4. Robert Ley, head of the Labor Front.

5. Wilhelm Keitel, Chief of Staff of the Supreme High Command of the German Armed Forces.

6. Ernst Kaltenbrunner, head of the RSHA.

7. Alfred Rosenberg, one of the main ideologists of Nazism, Reich Minister for Eastern Territories.

8. Hans Frank, head of the occupied Polish lands.

9. Wilhelm Frick, Minister of the Interior of the Reich.

10. Julius Streicher, Gauleiter, editor-in-chief of the anti-Semitic newspaper Sturmovik.

11. Hjalmar Schacht, Reich Minister of Economics before the war.

12. Walter Funk, Minister of Economics after Schacht.

13. Gustav Krupp von Bohlen und Halbach, head of the Friedrich Krupp concern.

14. Karl Doenitz, Admiral of the Fleet of the Third Reich.

15. Erich Raeder, Commander-in-Chief of the Navy.

16. Baldur von Schirach, head of the Hitler Youth, Gauleiter of Vienna.

17. Fritz Sauckel, leader of the forced deportations to the Reich of labor from the occupied territories.

18. Alfred Jodl, chief of staff of the operational leadership of the OKW.

19. Franz von Papen, Chancellor of Germany before Hitler, then Ambassador to Austria and Turkey.

20. Arthur Seyss-Inquart, Chancellor of Austria, then Imperial Commissioner for the occupied Holland.

21. Albert Speer, Reich Minister for Armaments

22. Konstantin von Neurath, in the first years of Hitler's reign, Minister of Foreign Affairs, then Viceroy in the Protectorate of Bohemia and Moravia.

23. Hans Fritsche, Head of the Press and Broadcasting Department in the Ministry of Propaganda.

Groups or organizations to which the defendants belonged were also accused.

The defendants were charged with planning, preparing, initiating or waging an aggressive war in order to establish the world domination of German imperialism, i.e. in crimes against peace; in the killing and torture of prisoners of war and civilians in occupied countries, the deportation of the civilian population to Germany for forced labor, the killing of hostages, the plundering of public and private property, the aimless destruction of cities and villages, in ruin not justified by military necessity, i.e. in war crimes; in extermination, enslavement, exile and other atrocities committed against the civilian population for political, racial or religious reasons, i.e. in crimes against humanity.

The question was also raised of recognizing as criminal such organizations of fascist Germany as the leadership of the National Socialist Party, the assault (SA) and security detachments of the National Socialist Party (SS), the security service (SD), the state secret police (Gestapo), the government cabinet and the general staff.

October 18, 1945 the indictment was submitted to the International Military Tribunal and, a month before the start of the trial, it was handed over to each of the accused in German.

On November 25, 1945, after reading the indictment, Robert Ley committed suicide, and Gustav Krupp was declared terminally ill by the medical commission, and the case against him was dismissed before the trial.

The rest of the accused were put on trial.

In accordance with the London Agreement, the International Military Tribunal was formed on an equal basis from representatives of four countries. Lord Geoffrey Lawrence of Great Britain was appointed Chief Justice. From other countries, the members of the tribunal approved:

From the USSR: Deputy Chairman of the Supreme Court of the Soviet Union Major General of Justice Iona Nikitchenko;

From the United States: Former Attorney General Francis Biddle;

From France: Henri Donnedier de Vabre, Professor of Criminal Law.

Each of the four countries sent its main prosecutors, their deputies and assistants to the trial:

From the USSR: Prosecutor General of the Ukrainian SSR Roman Rudenko;

From the United States: Federal Supreme Court Justice Robert Jackson;

From the United Kingdom: Hartley Shawcross;

For France: François de Menthon, who was absent during the first days of the process and was replaced by Charles Dubost, and then Champentier de Ribes was appointed instead of de Menthon.

During the trial, 403 open court hearings were held, 116 witnesses were questioned, numerous affidavits and documentary evidence were considered (mostly official documents German ministries and departments, the General Staff, military concerns and banks).

Due to the unprecedented gravity of the crimes committed by the defendants, doubts arose whether to observe democratic norms of legal proceedings in relation to them. For example, representatives of the prosecution from the UK and the US proposed not to give the defendants the last word. However, the French and Soviet sides insisted on the opposite.

The process was tense, not only because of the unusual nature of the tribunal itself and the charges brought against the defendants. The post-war aggravation of relations between the USSR and the West after Churchill's famous Fulton speech also had an effect, and the defendants, feeling the current political situation, skillfully played for time and expected to escape the deserved punishment. In such a difficult situation, the tough and professional actions of the Soviet prosecution played a key role. The film about concentration camps, filmed by front-line cameramen, finally turned the course of the process. The terrible pictures of Majdanek, Sachsenhausen, Auschwitz completely removed the doubts of the tribunal.

The International Military Tribunal sentenced:

To death by hanging: Goering, Ribbentrop, Keitel, Kaltenbrunner, Rosenberg, Frank, Frick, Streicher, Sauckel, Seyss-Inquart, Bormann (in absentia), Jodl (was posthumously acquitted during a retrial by a Munich court in 1953).

To life imprisonment: Hess, Funk, Raeder.

By 20 years in prison: Schirach, Speer.

By 15 years in prison: Neurata.

To 10 years in prison: Doenica.

Exonerated: Fritsche, Papen, Shakht.

The Tribunal recognized as criminal the organizations of the SS, SD, SA, Gestapo and the leadership of the Nazi Party and did not recognize as such the government office of Nazi Germany, the General Staff and the High Command of the Wehrmacht. The member of the Tribunal from the USSR stated in a dissenting opinion that he disagreed with the decision not to recognize these organizations as criminal, with the acquittal of Schacht, Papen, Fritsche and the undeservedly lenient sentence for Hess.

(Military Encyclopedia. Chairman of the Main Editorial Commission S.B. Ivanov. Military Publishing. Moscow. in 8 volumes -2004)

Most of the convicts filed petitions for clemency; Raeder - on the replacement of life imprisonment with the death penalty; Goering, Jodl and Keitel - about replacing hanging with execution if the request for pardon is not granted. All of these applications were denied.

The death penalty was carried out on the night of October 16, 1946 in the building of the Nuremberg prison. Göring poisoned himself in prison shortly before his execution.

The sentence was carried out by American Sergeant John Wood.

Funk and Raeder, sentenced to life imprisonment, were pardoned in 1957. After Speer and Schirach were released in 1966, only Hess remained in prison. The right-wing forces of Germany repeatedly demanded that he be pardoned, but the victorious powers refused to commute the sentence. On August 17, 1987, Hess was found hanged in his cell.

The Nuremberg Tribunal, having created a precedent for the jurisdiction of senior government officials to an international court, refuted the medieval principle "Kings are under the jurisdiction of God alone." It was with the Nuremberg trials that the history of international criminal law began.

The principles of international law contained in the Charter of the Tribunal and expressed in the verdict were confirmed by a resolution of the UN General Assembly of December 11, 1946.

The Nuremberg trials legally sealed the final defeat of fascism.

The material was prepared on the basis of information from open sources