Hanged at Nuremberg. The Nuremberg Trials: Briefly About the Main Court of History

November 20, 1945 at 10.00 in the small German town of Nuremberg opened an international trial in the case of the main Nazi war criminals European countries axes Rome-Berlin-Tokyo. This city was not chosen by chance: for many years it was a citadel of fascism, an unwitting witness to the congresses of the National Socialist Party and the parades of its storm troops. The Nuremberg Trials were carried out by the International Military Tribunal (IMT), created on the basis of the London Agreement of August 8, 1945 between the governments of the leading allied states - the USSR, the USA, Great Britain and France, which was joined by 19 other countries - members of the Anti-Hitler coalition. The agreement was based on the provisions of the Moscow Declaration of October 30, 1943 on the responsibility of the Nazis for the atrocities committed, under which the leaders of the USSR, the USA and Great Britain put their signatures.

The building of the Palace of Justice in Nuremberg, where the Nuremberg trials took place

The establishment of a military tribunal with international status became possible largely thanks to the creation at the conference in San Francisco (April-June 1945) of the United Nations - a world security organization that united all peace-loving states, which jointly rendered a worthy rebuff to fascist aggression. The Tribunal was established in the interests of all countries - members of the United Nations, which, after the end of the bloodiest of wars, set as their main goal "to save succeeding generations from the scourge of war: and to reaffirm faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the human person." This is written in the UN Charter. At that historical stage, immediately after the end of the Second World War, for this purpose it was extremely necessary to popularly recognize the Nazi regime and its main leaders as guilty of unleashing an aggressive war against almost all of humanity, which brought him monstrous grief and untold suffering. Officially condemning Nazism and making it outlawed meant ending one of the threats that could potentially lead to a new world war in the future. In his opening remarks at the first session of the court, presiding Lord Justice J. Lawrence (MWM UK member) emphasized the uniqueness of the process and its “social significance for millions of people in all Globe". That is why a huge responsibility lay on the members of the international court. They had to "honestly and conscientiously carry out their duties without any connivance, in accordance with the sacred principles of law and justice."

The organization and jurisdiction of the International Military Tribunal were determined by its Charter, which constituted an integral part of the 1945 London Agreement.According to the Charter, the Tribunal had the right to judge and punish persons who, acting in the interests of the European countries of the Axis, individually or as members of an organization, committed crimes against peace, military crimes and crimes against humanity. The IMT consisted of judges - representatives from the four founding states (one from each country), their deputies and chief prosecutors. The main prosecutors were appointed to the Committee: from the USSR - R.A. Rudenko, from the USA - Robert H. Jackson, from Great Britain - H. Shawcross, from France - F. de Menton, and then Ch. De Ribes. The Committee was entrusted with the investigation of the cases of the main Nazi criminals and their prosecution. The process was built on a combination of procedural orders of all states represented in the tribunal. Decisions were taken by a majority vote.

In the courtroom

Almost the entire ruling elite of the Third Reich - the highest military and statesmen, diplomats, major bankers and industrialists: G. Goering, R. Hess, I. von Ribbentrop, W. Keitel, E. Kaltenbrunner, A. Rosenberg, H. Frank, W. Frick, J. Streicher, V. Funk, K Doenitz, E. Raeder, B. von Schirach, F. Sauckel, A. Jodl, A. Seiss-Inquart, A. Speer, K. von Neurath, H. Fritsche, J. Schacht, R. Lei (hanged himself in a cell before the start of the trial), G. Krupp (was declared terminally ill, his case was suspended), M. Bormann (tried in absentia, since he disappeared and was not found) and F. von Papen. Only the most senior leaders of Nazism - Hitler, Goebbels and Himmler, who committed suicide during the storming of Berlin by the Red Army, were not in the courtroom. The accused were participants in all major domestic and foreign political, as well as military events since Hitler came to power. Therefore, according to the French publicist R. Cartier, who was present at the trial and wrote in 1946 the book “Secrets of War. According to the materials of the Nuremberg trials "," their trial was a trial over the regime as a whole, over an entire era, over the whole country. "

The chief prosecutor from the USSR at the Nuremberg trials R.A. Rudenko

The International Military Tribunal also considered the issue of recognizing as criminal the leadership of the National Socialist Party (NSDAP), its assault (SA) and security detachments (SS), the security service (SD) and the state secret police (Gestapo), as well as the government cabinet, the General Staff and the High Command (OKW) Nazi Germany... All crimes committed by the Nazis during the war were subdivided in accordance with the Charter of the International Military Tribunal into crimes:

Against peace (planning, preparing, unleashing or waging an aggressive war or war in violation of international treaties);

War crimes (violations of the laws or customs of war: murder, torture or enslavement civilian population; killing or torturing prisoners of war; robbery of state, public or private property; destruction or looting of cultural property; senseless destruction of cities or villages);

Crimes against humanity (destruction of Slavic and other peoples; creation of secret points for the destruction of civilians; killing of the mentally ill).

The International Military Tribunal, which has been in session for almost a year, has done a tremendous job. During the process, 403 open court sessions were held, 116 witnesses were questioned, over 300 thousand written testimonies and about 3 thousand documents were considered, including photo and film accusations (mainly official documents of German ministries and departments, the High Command of the Wehrmacht, the General Staff, military concerns and banks, materials from personal archives). If Germany had won the war, or if the end of the war had not been so swift and crushing, then all these documents (many with the heading "Top Secret"), most likely, would have been destroyed or were forever hidden from the world community. Numerous witnesses who testified during the trial, according to R. Cartier, were not limited to mere facts, but covered and commented on them in detail, "bringing new shades, colors and the spirit of the era itself." In the hands of judges and prosecutors were incontrovertible evidence of the Nazis' criminal designs and bloody atrocities. Wide publicity and openness became one of the main principles of the international process: more than 60 thousand passes were issued for the presence in the courtroom, the sessions were held simultaneously in four languages, the press and radio were represented by about 250 journalists from different countries.

The numerous crimes of the Nazis and their accomplices, revealed and made public during the Nuremberg trials, are truly amazing. Everything that could only be invented prohibitively cruel, inhuman and antihuman was included in the arsenal of the fascists. Here we should mention the barbaric methods of warfare, and the cruel treatment of prisoners of war, grossly violating all international conventions previously adopted in these areas, and the enslavement of the population of the occupied territories, and the targeted destruction of entire cities and villages from the face of the earth, and sophisticated technologies of mass destruction. ... The world was shocked by the facts voiced during the process about the savage experiments on people, about the massive use of special preparations for killing "Cyclone A" and "Cyclone B", about the so-called gas vans, gas "baths" that work without stopping day and night in powerful cremation ovens. Nazi subhumans, cynically considering themselves the only chosen nation that has the right to decide the fate of other peoples, created a whole "industry of death." The death camp in Auschwitz, for example, was designed to exterminate 30 thousand people a day, Treblinka - 25 thousand, Sobibur - 22 thousand, etc. In total, 18 million people passed through the system of concentration camps and death camps, about 11 million of whom were brutally destroyed.

Nazi criminals in the dock

The accusations of the incompetence of the Nuremberg trials, which arose years after its end among Western revisionist historians, some lawyers and neo-Nazis, and boiled down to the fact that it was allegedly not a fair trial, but a "swift reprisal" and "revenge" of the winners, at least untenable. All the defendants were already on October 18, 1945, that is, more than a month before the start of the trial, an indictment was served so that they could prepare for their defense. Thus, the basic rights of the accused were respected. The world press, commenting on the indictment, noted that this document was drawn up on behalf of the "offended conscience of mankind", that this was not "an act of revenge, but the triumph of justice", not only the leaders of Nazi Germany, but the entire system of fascism would appear before the court. It was the supremely just judgment of the peoples of the world.

I. von Ribbentrop, B. von Schirach, V. Keitel, F. Sauckel in the dock

The defendants were given ample opportunity to defend themselves against the charges brought against them: they all had lawyers, they were provided with copies of all documentary evidence on German, assistance was provided in the search and obtaining required documents, the delivery of witnesses whom the defenders considered it necessary to call. However, the accused and their lawyers from the very beginning of the trial took a course to prove the legal inconsistency of the Charter of the International Military Tribunal. In an effort to avoid inevitable punishment, they tried to shift all responsibility for the crimes committed exclusively to Adolf Hitler, the SS and the Gestapo, put forward counter-accusations against the founding states of the tribunal. It is characteristic and indicative that none of them had the slightest doubt about their complete innocence.

G. Goering and R. Hess in the dock

After painstaking and meticulous work, which lasted almost a year, on September 30 - October 1, 1946, the International Court of Justice's Judgment was announced. It analyzed the basic principles of international law violated by Nazi Germany, the arguments of the parties, and gave a picture of the criminal activities of the fascist state over more than 12 years of its existence. The International Military Tribunal found all the defendants (with the exception of Schacht, Fritsche and von Papen) guilty of conspiracy to prepare and conduct wars of aggression, as well as countless war crimes and atrocities against humanity. Twelve Nazi criminals were sentenced to death by hanging: Goering, Ribbentrop, Keitel, Kaltenbrunner, Rosenberg, Frank, Frick, Streichel, Sauckel, Jodl, Seyss-Inquart, Bormann (in absentia). The rest received various terms of imprisonment: Hess, Funk, Raeder - for life, Schirach and Speer - 20 years, Neurath - 15 years, Doenitz - 10 years.

The representative of the prosecution from France speaks

The tribunal also found the leadership of the National Socialist Party, SS, SD and Gestapo criminal. Thus, even the verdict, according to which only 11 out of 21 defendants were sentenced to death, and three were generally acquitted, clearly showed that the justice was not formal and nothing was predetermined in advance. At the same time, a member of the international court from the USSR - the country most affected by the hands of Nazi criminals, Major General of Justice I.T. Nikitchenko, in his Dissenting Opinion, stated that the Soviet side of the court did not agree with the acquittal of three defendants. He spoke in favor of the death penalty against R. Hess, and also expressed disagreement with the decision not to recognize the Nazi government, the High Command, the General Staff and the SA as criminal organizations.

The convicts' petitions for clemency were rejected by the Control Council for Germany, and on the night of October 16, 1946, the death sentence was carried out (shortly before that, Goering committed suicide).

Following the largest and longest international trial in history in Nuremberg, 12 more trials took place in the city until 1949, in which the crimes of more than 180 Nazi leaders were examined. Most of them also received their well-deserved punishment. Military tribunals that took place in Europe after the end of World War II also in other cities and countries have convicted a total of more than 30 thousand Nazi criminals. However, many Nazis, guilty of committing atrocities, unfortunately managed to escape from justice. But their search was not stopped, but continued: the UN made an important decision not to take into account the statute of limitations for Nazi criminals. So, only in the 1960-1970s, tens and hundreds of Nazis were found, arrested and convicted. On the basis of the materials of the Nuremberg trial, E. Koch (in Poland) and in 1963 A. Eichmann (in Israel) were brought to trial and sentenced to death.

It is important to emphasize that the purpose of the international process in Nuremberg was to condemn the Nazi leaders - the main ideological inspirers and leaders of unjustifiably cruel actions and bloody atrocities, and not the entire German people. In this regard, the British representative at the trial said in his closing speech: “I repeat again that we do not seek to blame the people of Germany. Our goal is to protect him and give him the opportunity to rehabilitate himself and win the respect and friendship of the whole world. But how can this be done if we leave in its midst unpunished and uncondemned these elements of Nazism, which are mainly responsible for tyranny and crimes and which, as the tribunal can believe, cannot be turned to the path of freedom and justice? " As for the military leaders, in the opinion of some who were only doing their military duty, unquestioningly following the orders of the political leadership of Germany, it must be emphasized that the tribunal condemned not just "disciplined warriors", but people who considered "war a form of existence" and who never learned "lessons from the experience of defeat in one of them."

To the question asked by the accused at the very beginning of the Nuremberg trials: "Do you plead guilty?", All the accused, as one, answered in the negative. But even after almost a year - enough time for rethinking and reevaluating their actions - they did not change their minds.

“I do not recognize the decision of this court: I continue to be loyal to our Fuehrer,” Goering said in his last word at the trial. “Let's wait twenty years. Germany will rise again. Whatever judgment this judgment handed down to me, I will be found innocent before the face of Christ. I am ready to repeat everything one more time, even if it means that they will burn me alive, ”- these words belong to R. Hess. A minute before the execution Streichel exclaimed: “Heil Hitler! With God!". Jodl echoed him: "I salute you, my Germany!"

The process also condemned the militant German militarism, which was "the core of the Nazi party as well as the core of the armed forces." Moreover, it is important to understand that the concept of "militarism" is by no means connected with the military profession. This is a phenomenon that, since the Nazis came to power, permeated the entire German society, all spheres of its activity - political, military, social, economic. The militaristic German leaders preached and practiced the dictatorship of the military. They themselves enjoyed the war and sought to instill the same attitude in their “flock”. Moreover, the need to resist evil, also with the help of weapons, on the part of the peoples who have become the target of aggression, could rebound at them themselves.

In his concluding speech at the trial, the US representative said: “Militarism inevitably leads to a cynical and malicious disregard for the rights of others, the foundations of civilization. Militarism destroys the moral foundations of the people who practice it, and since it can only be defeated by the force of its own weapons, it undermines the morality of the peoples who are forced to fight it. " In support of the idea of the corrupting effect of Nazism on the minds and morals of ordinary Germans, soldiers and officers of the Wehrmacht, one, but very characteristic, example can be cited. In document No. 162, submitted to the USSR International Court, the captured German Chief Corporal Lekourt admitted in his testimony that he personally shot and tortured 1200 Soviet prisoners of war and civilians in the period from September 1941 to October 1942 , for which he received the next title ahead of schedule and was awarded the "Eastern Medal". The worst thing is that he committed these atrocities not on the orders of higher commanders, but, in his own words, "in his free time from work, for the sake of interest", "for his own pleasure." Isn't this the best proof of the guilt of the Nazi leaders towards their people!

American soldier, professional executioner John Woods prepares a noose for criminals

THE IMPORTANCE OF THE NURNBERG PROCESS

Today, 70 years after the start of the Nuremberg trials (70 years from the date of its completion in the fall of next year), it is clearly visible what a huge role it played in the historical, legal and socio-political plans. The Nuremberg trials became a historical event, first of all, as the triumph of the Law before the Nazi lawlessness. He exposed the misanthropic essence of German Nazism, his plans for the destruction of entire states and peoples, his transcendent inhumanity and cruelty, absolute immorality, true dimensions and the depth of the atrocities of the Nazi executioners and the extreme danger of Nazism and fascism for all mankind. The entire totalitarian system of Nazism as a whole was subjected to moral condemnation. Thus, a moral and ethical barrier was created for the revival of Nazism in the future, or at least for its general condemnation.

We must not forget that the entire civilized world, which has just got rid of the "brown plague", applauded the verdict of the International Military Tribunal. It is a pity that now in some European countries in one form or another there is a revival of Nazism, and in the Baltic states and in Ukraine, the process of glorification and glorification of the members of the Waffen-SS detachments, which during the Nuremberg trials were recognized as criminal along with German security detachments, is actively underway. SS. It is important that these phenomena of today are harshly condemned by all peace-loving peoples and such authoritative international and regional organizations security like the UN, OSCE and the European Union. I would not like to believe that we are witnessing what one of the Nazi criminals, G. Fritsche, predicted in his speech at the Nuremberg Trials: “If you believe that this is the end, then you are mistaken. We are witnessing the birth of the Hitler legend. "

It is important to know and remember that no one canceled the decisions of the Nuremberg Tribunal! It seems completely unacceptable to radically revise its decisions and, in general, its historical significance, as well as the main results and lessons of World War II, which, unfortunately, some Western historians, lawyers and politicians are trying to do today. It is important to note that the materials of the Nuremberg Trials are one of the most important sources for studying the history of World War II and creating a holistic and objective picture of the atrocities of the Nazi leaders, as well as for obtaining an unambiguous answer to the question of who is to blame for unleashing this monstrous war. In Nuremberg, it was Nazi Germany, its political, party and military leaders who were recognized as the main and only perpetrators of international aggression. Therefore, the attempts of some modern historians to share this blame equally between Germany and the USSR are completely untenable.

From the point of view of legal significance, the Nuremberg Trials became an important milestone in the development of international law. The Charter of the International Military Tribunal and the sentence passed almost 70 years ago have become "one of the cornerstones of modern international law, one of its basic principles," wrote a well-known Russian researcher of various issues and aspects of the Nuremberg trial, Professor A.I. Poltorak in his work “The Nuremberg Trial. Basic legal problems ”. His point of view is of particular importance also because he was the secretary of the USSR delegation in this process.

It should be admitted that among some lawyers there is an opinion that not everything was smooth in the organization and conduct of the Nuremberg trial from the point of view of legal norms, but it must be borne in mind that it was the first international court of this kind. However, no strictest lawyer who understands this will ever argue that Nuremberg did nothing progressive and meaningful for the development of international law. And it is completely unacceptable that politicians take on the interpretation of the legal subtleties of the process, claiming at the same time to express the ultimate truth.

The Nuremberg Trials became the first event of this kind and significance in history. He defined new types of international crimes, which then became firmly established in international law and the national legislation of many states. In addition to the fact that in Nuremberg the aggression was recognized as a crime against peace (for the first time in history!), The officials responsible for planning, preparing and unleashing aggressive wars were also brought to justice for the first time. For the first time, it was recognized that the position of the head of state, department or army, as well as the execution of government orders or a criminal order does not exempt from criminal liability. The Nuremberg decisions led to the creation of a special branch in international law - international criminal law.

The Nuremberg Trials were followed by the Tokyo Trial, a trial of major Japanese war criminals that took place in Tokyo from May 3, 1946 to November 12, 1948, at the International Military Tribunal for the Far East. The demand for a trial of Japanese war criminals was formulated in the Potsdam Declaration of July 26, 1945. The Japan Surrender Act of September 2, 1945 pledged to "honestly comply with the terms of the Potsdam Declaration," including the punishment of war criminals.

The Nuremberg Principles, approved by the UN General Assembly (resolutions of December 11, 1946 and November 27, 1947), have become universally recognized norms of international law. They serve as the basis for refusal to carry out a criminal order and warn of the responsibility of those leaders of states who are ready to commit crimes against peace and humanity. Subsequently, crimes against humanity included genocide, racism and racial discrimination, apartheid, the use of nuclear weapons, colonialism. The principles and norms formulated by the Nuremberg Trials formed the basis of all post-war international legal documents aimed at preventing aggression, war crimes and crimes against humanity (for example, the 1948 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, Geneva Convention 1949 (d. "On the Protection of Victims of War", 1968 Convention "On the Inapplicability of the Statute of Limitation to War Crimes and Crimes against Humanity", Rome Statute 1998 "On the Establishment of the International Criminal Court").

The Nuremberg Trials set a legal precedent for the establishment of such international tribunals. In the 1990s, the Nuremberg Military Tribunal became the prototype for the creation of the International Tribunal for Rwanda and the International Tribunal for Yugoslavia, established by the UN Security Council. True, as it turned out, they do not always pursue fair goals and are not always completely impartial and objective. This was especially evident in the work of the Tribunal for Yugoslavia.

In 2002, at the request of the President of Sierra Leone, Ahmed Kabbah, who turned to the UN Secretary General, under the auspices of this authoritative organization, Special Court across Sierra Leone. He was supposed to conduct an international trial over those responsible for the most serious crimes (mainly military and against humanity) during the internal armed conflict in Sierra Leone.

Unfortunately, when establishing (or, on the contrary, deliberately not establishing) international tribunals like the Nuremberg tribunals, nowadays there are often "double standards" and the decisive factor is not the desire to find the true culprits of crimes against peace and humanity, but in a certain way to demonstrate their political influence on the international stage, show who is who. This, for example, happened during the work of the International Tribunal for Yugoslavia. To prevent this from happening in the future, the political will and cohesion of the UN member states is required.

The political significance of the Nuremberg Trials is also obvious. He initiated the process of demilitarization and denazification of Germany, i.e. bringing to life critical decisions adopted in 1945 at the Yalta (Crimean) and Potsdam conferences. As you know, in order to eradicate fascism, destroy the Nazi system of statehood, liquidate the German armed forces and military industry, Berlin and the country's territory were divided into zones of occupation, in which the victorious states exercised administrative power. We note with regret that our Western allies, disdaining the agreed decisions, were the first to take steps to revive the defense industry, the armed forces and the creation of the FRG in their zone of occupation, and with the emergence of the military-political NATO bloc and the admission of West Germany to it.

But, assessing the post-war socio-political significance of Nuremberg, we emphasize that never before has the trial brought together all the progressive forces of the world, striving once and for all to condemn not only specific war criminals, but also the very idea of achieving foreign policy and economic goals with the help of aggression against other countries and peoples. Supporters of peace and democracy regarded it as an important step towards the practical implementation of the Yalta agreements of 1945 to establish a new post-war order in Europe and throughout the world, which was to be based, on the one hand, on a complete and universal rejection of aggressive military methods in international politics, and on the other, on mutual understanding and friendly all-round cooperation and collective efforts of all peace-loving countries, regardless of their socio-political and economic structure. The possibility of such cooperation and its fruitfulness was clearly proved during the Second World War, when most of the states of the world, realizing the mortal danger of the "brown plague", united in the Anti-Hitler coalition and by joint efforts overcame it. The creation in 1945 of the world security organization - the UN - was further proof of this. Unfortunately, with the beginning of the Cold War, the development of this progressive process - towards rapprochement and cooperation of states with different socio-political systems - turned out to be significantly hampered and did not go as it was thought at the end of World War II.

It is important that the Nuremberg Trials always stand in the way of the revival of Nazism and aggression as a state policy in our day and in the future. Its results and historical lessons, which cannot be forgotten, let alone revision and reassessment, should serve as a warning to everyone who sees themselves as the elected "rulers of the destinies" of states and peoples. This requires only the desire and will to unite the efforts of all freedom-loving, democratic forces of the world, their union, such as the states of the Anti-Hitler coalition managed to create during the Second World War.

Shepova N.Ya.,
Candidate of Historical Sciences, Associate Professor, Senior Research Fellow
Research Institute (Military History)
Military Academy of the General Staff of the RF Armed Forces

Erich Koch is a prominent figure in the NSDAP and the Third Reich. Gauleiter (October 1, 1928 - May 8, 1945) and Chief President (September 1933 - May 8, 1945) of East Prussia, Head of the Civil Administration of the Bialystok District (August 1, 1941-1945), Reich Commissioner of Ukraine (1 September 1941 - November 10, 1944), SA Obergruppenführer (1938), war criminal.

Adolf Eichmann is a German Gestapo officer directly responsible for the mass extermination of Jews during World War II. By order of Reinhard Heydrich, he took part in the work of the Wannsee Conference on January 20, 1942, at which measures were discussed for the "final decision Jewish question"- about the extermination of several million Jews. As a secretary, he kept the minutes of the meeting. Eichmann proposed to immediately resolve the issue of the expulsion of Jews to Eastern Europe. The direct management of this operation was entrusted to him.

He was in a privileged position in the Gestapo, often receiving orders directly from Himmler, bypassing the immediate superiors G. Müller and E. Kaltenbrunner. In March 1944, he headed the Sonderkommando, which organized the dispatch from Budapest to Auschwitz of transport with Hungarian Jews. In August 1944 he presented a report to Himmler, in which he reported on the extermination of 4 million Jews.

Not everyone who appeared before the tribunal received the same sentence. Of the 24 people, six were found guilty on all four counts. For example, Franz Papen, ambassador to Austria and then to Turkey, was released in the courtroom, although the Soviet side insisted on his guilt. In 1947, he received a sentence, which was then softened. The Nazi criminal ended his years ... in a castle, but far from a prison. And he continued to bend the line of his party, releasing "Memoirs of a Political Leader of Hitlerite Germany. 1933-1947 ", where he spoke about the correctness and consistency of German policy in the 1930s:" I made many mistakes in my life and more than once came to false conclusions. However, I owe it to my own family to correct at least some of my most offensive distortions of reality. The facts, when examined impartially, recreate a completely different picture. Nevertheless, this is not my main task. At the end of my life, which has stretched over three generations, I am most concerned with contributing to a greater understanding of the role of Germany in the events of this period. "

The Charter of the Nuremberg Tribunal was formulated to ensure a fair trial of the war criminals of Hitlerite Germany. It was a process of enormous scale and significance, which was carried out by the USSR, Great Britain, the USA and France over the main Nazi leaders. The main process was followed by twelve additional processes.

Next, we will consider in more detail the main provisions of the Charter of the tribunal, its area of jurisdiction and exclusive competence, formation, significance. It will also highlight the main process that took place in the fall of 1945, as well as provide a brief information on the consideration of subsequent cases.

International military tribunal: concept, jurisdiction

The International (Nuremberg) Military Tribunal is a judicial body that prosecutes, prosecutes and adjudicates the main war criminals of European countries who fought on the side of Nazi Germany during the war. The basis of the Nuremberg Tribunal is an agreement that was concluded on August 8, 1945 in London, the capital of Great Britain, between the governments of the Soviet Union, the United States, Great Britain and France. The tribunal itself was in Berlin, and the process took place in Nuremberg, a German city located in the north of the central part of Bavaria.

The exclusive competence of the Nuremberg Tribunal was a requirement of the times. The jurisdiction extended to such crimes:

Crimes against the world. This means planning, preparing, waging a war that violates international peace agreements or assurances, participation in any conspiracy, general plan, which involved the implementation of any of the above actions.
War crimes. That is, violation of the laws of war. This item includes torture, slavery, torture, labor or other service imposed on the civilian population of the occupied territory, military persons, hostages. They are also tried for plundering private or public property, senseless destruction of infrastructure, ruin that is not justified by military necessity.
Crimes against humanity. These include murders, exile, enslavement, extermination and other cruel acts committed against civilians, persecution for political, racial, religious or other reasons for the further implementation of any crime within the jurisdiction of the tribunal. It does not matter whether such acts are punishable under the domestic law of the country in which they were committed or not.

These crimes, committed by the leaders of Hitlerite Germany, are the exclusive competence of the Nuremberg Tribunal. This composition of criminal acts is enshrined in the sixth article of the Charter. A more detailed discussion of the provisions will be presented below.

Crimes against humanity, peace, military affairs were considered in the composition of eight people. The process was led by one judge and a deputy from each of the parties to the agreement signed in London on August 8, 1945.

London conference on 8 August 1945: adoption of the charter

The London Conference is a meeting of the leaders of the four victorious states of the war, which took place in London from June 26 to August 8, 1945. The side of the USSR was represented at the conference by the Deputy Chairman of the Supreme Court I. T. Nikitchenko and Professor A. N. Trainin, a criminologist and internationalist. The official protocol of the meeting was not drawn up. The conference was held with the doors closed to the hall.

On the last day of the conference, an Agreement was signed between the leaderships of the USSR, Great Britain, France and the United States on the prosecution and judicial punishment of the main criminals of the Axis countries, that is, the Third Reich, Italy and the Japanese Empire. The International Military Tribunal in Nuremberg was empowered to judge and punish people who committed criminal acts against the world order and humanity. The agreement was signed by: from the USSR - I. T. Nikitchenko and A. N. Trainin, from the USA - Robert H. Jackson, Member of the Supreme Court, from France - Robert Falco, Member of the High Court, from Great Britain - Chancellor William Allen Jowitt.

At the same time, the charter of the Nuremberg Tribunal was adopted, determining the procedure for its organization, jurisdiction and general principles of work, guarantees for the defendants during the process, as well as rights. These issues will be discussed in detail below.

Charter of the military tribunal at Nuremberg: the history of the drafting

The Statute of the Nuremberg Tribunal was an annex to the Agreement adopted at the London Conference on August 8, 1945. Usually the document is called the London or Nuremberg Rite. The document was developed on the basis of the Moscow Declaration adopted at the 1943 conference in Moscow by the foreign ministers of the USSR, Great Britain and the United States. The declaration determined on what conditions the states would cooperate. Disarmament of German troops and the trial of war criminals were important topics. The document provided for the occupation of Germany by the allied forces until the complete destruction of the Nazi regime.

The text of the Charter of the Nuremberg Military Tribunal was drawn up immediately after the surrender of Germany, on May 8, 1945, in London. Compiled by Robert Falco, Iona Nikitchenko and Robert Jackson. The text was published on August 8, 1945. As mentioned earlier, the agreement between the USSR, Great Britain, the United States and France on the prosecution and sentencing of the main war criminals of the Axis countries was officially signed at the London conference in early August 1945. Subsequently, the Charter was ratified by 19 other members of the anti-Hitler coalition.

Basic Provisions of the Statute of the Nuremberg Tribunal

Part I of the Charter concerns the organization of an international military tribunal. It is indicated that it was created for a fair trial and punishment of war criminals (Art. 1). The composition of the tribunal is established in the number of four judges and their deputies, with each of the parties appointing one judge and one deputy (Article 2). A judge can only be replaced by his deputy, and none of the accused, defense lawyer or prosecutor can challenge either the tribunal, or its members, or substitutes (Article 3). In addition, it provided for the possibility of establishing additional courts if necessary (Article 7).

Part II of the Charter deals with jurisdiction and general principles work. Special attention in this part deserves an article that reveals what actions entail responsibility. Art. 6 of the Statute of the Nuremberg Tribunal describes what is meant by the concepts by which the main criminals of Nazi Germany were accused. It is indicated that the position of the defendants as head of state or an official is not considered as a basis for mitigation of punishment or exemption from liability (Article 7). The fact that the convicted person acted on the orders of the government or the command also does not absolve from responsibility, but can mitigate the punishment (Article 8). Cases of persons who are convicted of crimes against peace, the tribunal has the right to consider even in the absence of the accused themselves (Article 12).

Part III deals with the War Criminals Committee, while IV defines the guarantees for the defendants and establishes the procedure for a fair trial (Art. 16). Part V (Articles 17-25) sets out the rights of the tribunal, Part VI deals with the sentencing procedure, and Part VII deals with costs. In the last two parts of the Charter, Art. 27, which gives the tribunal the right to sentence the defendant to death if this decision is found to be fair. As for the costs, they were covered by the parties at the expense of the funds of the Control Council of Germany.

Nuremberg Principles of International Law

The principles of the Nuremberg Tribunal were formulated in 1950 by a special Commission on behalf of the UN in order to further create a Criminal Code of international importance. The members of the commission summarized the activities of the Nuremberg Tribunal and formulated the basic principles that found expression in the decision of the judges. Subsequently, these provisions were recognized by the world community. There are seven principles in total:

Any person who has committed a criminal act is responsible for it and is subject to just punishment.
If any action under the domestic law of the country is not a crime, but under international law, then the person is still responsible.
Heads of state and members of government are not exempt from responsibility.
Individuals who acted on orders from the government or command are not exempt from liability if the choice was actually possible.
Every accused person has the right to a lawful hearing based on facts and principles of law.
Crimes against peace, military, against humanity are punished as international law.
Complicity in the above acts is equated to an international crime.

The main trial against the leaders of the Nazi regime

The first meeting of the Nuremberg Tribunal for the main leaders of the regime took place on November 20, 1945. From the USSR, the Nazis were tried: I. Nikitchenko (Major General of Justice) and A. Volchkov (Colonel of Justice) as an assistant. The defendants received defenders in the person of German lawyers, the security of the meeting and the escort of persons under investigation to the cells was carried out by the US Army.

The location of the tribunal was chosen in the Bavarian city of Nuremberg. This decision was symbolic. It was here that the terrifying racial legislation of Nazi Germany was signed, the Nazis loved to hold party conventions in this place, and the Palace of Justice suffered relatively little from bombs dropped by allied aviation, accommodated a sufficient number of people and was connected to the cells where the accused were kept by an underground passage.

There were 23 war criminals in the dock (among them were F. Sauckel, head of deportations from the occupied territory, G. Fritsche, head of one of the departments of the Ministry of Propaganda, G. V. Goering, Reichsmarschall, head air forces, R. Hess, Hitler's deputy, I. von Ribbentropp, Foreign Minister, A. Rosenberg, one of the main ideological leaders, and others) and accused in absentia. There were no meetings of Adolf Hitler, the chief SS officer G. Himmler, the minister of propaganda J. Goebbels, who committed suicide, fearing responsibility for the crimes committed.

The defendants were accused of crimes against the world order, unleashing a war, pursuing a policy of anti-Semitism and racism, murder and cruel treatment of prisoners of war. Especially carefully examined the Nuremberg Tribunal crimes against children, who often became victims of the Nazis. The most difficult points were supported by a significant evidence base. Dozens of witnesses to violent crimes spoke. Unexpected for those who were in the dock was the speech of Friedrich Paulus, who was taken prisoner in Stalingrad. It was he who was developing the plan, code-named "Barbarossa".

Prominent figures of Hitlerite Germany recorded all their crimes with German clarity, resorting to the help of stenographers and keeping diaries. They did this, feeling themselves to be absolute winners, not counting in any way that these documents would become the strongest evidence in the accusation. The Nuremberg Tribunal condemned not only the main ideologists, military and political figures, but also recognized as criminal all organizations that followed the instructions of the Nazis, that is, the Gestapo, SS, SD and the like.

The accused were given hope that after Churchill's Fulton speech, relations between the USSR and Great Britain, the United States were very strained, this could bury the trial. But the day when the former commandant of the Auschwitz extermination camp spoke before the judges and deputies was truly black for the Nazi leaders. The executioner said that two and a half million prisoners were killed in the camp. He almost proudly told that in each of the cells they killed two thousand people at once, while in another camp only two hundred unfortunates could be exterminated at a time. The executioner was hanged by a court verdict in Poland in April 1947.

Court decision in the case of the leaders of Nazi Germany

The verdict began to be announced on September 30, 1945, but the list of indictments was so long that it took a whole day. Everything ended only on October 1st. During the announcement of the verdict, the defendants tried to pretend that they did not care, but in fact, there was excitement. frantically drawing something on scraps of paper, Hermann Goering tried to smile tightly, Alfred Rosenberg cowered, defiantly crossed his arms, and Hans Frank just shook his head.

The decision of the Nuremberg Tribunal was as follows:

12 people were sentenced to death, of whom Bormann was convicted in absentia, Jodl was posthumously acquitted at revision in 1953, and Goering committed suicide a few hours before his execution;
3 people were sentenced to life imprisonment: Funk, Raeder, Hess;
by 20 years of imprisonment: Speer, Shirakh;
by 15 years of imprisonment: Neurath;
by 10 years of imprisonment: Denitsa;
three people were acquitted: Papen (German ambassador to Austria and Turkey), Fritsche (head of press and radio broadcasting), Schacht (minister of economics, who held this position before the war).

Subsequent (Minor) Nuremberg Trials

After the main trial over the highest leaders of the Third Reich, twelve more subsequent ones were carried out, later called minor. The main difference was that the cases were conducted exclusively by American judges. Under investigation were Nazi doctors, judges, generals of the southeastern front, persons guilty of racial crimes, the military command of Germany. Alfried Krupp, Friedrich Flick, IG Farben (German industrialists), (Field Marshal of the Luftwaffe) were separately condemned. In total, 183 persons accused of various crimes were brought before twelve trials. 24 people were sentenced to death (eleven of them were pardoned), to life imprisonment - twenty, to various terms - 98, acquitted - 35. The remaining accused were not sentenced according to various reasons... Some of them were found insane, others died before trial. In 1951, many of the convicts were released under an amnesty; some of the convicts were reduced in terms of their sentences.

Nuremberg International Tribunal and Bandera (OUN / UPA)

Personally, Stepan Bandera and the OUN / UPA condemned the Nuremberg Tribunal, but they did not appear before the International Military Court. There is no official conviction for them. The decision of the Nuremberg Tribunal on the Bandera people was not voiced, but this does not mean that their crimes are not classified as those committed against peace or humanity, military.

None of the materials of the tribunal mentions the recognition of Stepan Bandera as a war criminal, although, according to the principles of international law, he is exactly what he is. Not a single mention of Bandera in 42 tones of the case can be directly interpreted against him.

Some researchers prefer to refer to the materials of the interrogation of E. Stolze, who during the conversation mentioned the order of the Bandera members to organize demonstrations in Ukraine during the German attack on the USSR in order to break the rear of the armies and convince the public about the possible collapse of the rear. According to the results of the consideration of the case, Erwin Stolze's organization was not recognized as criminal, so cooperation with him cannot be interpreted as a crime for which a person is responsible before the Nuremberg Tribunal.

Significance of the Nuremberg Trials and the Tribunal for World History

The Nuremberg Military Tribunal and its significance in history is a topic for a separate article, since the process created a precedent for the trial of high-ranking officials and refuted the principle "Kings have jurisdiction only to God." The principles that were enshrined in the Charter are recognized by the UN as generally accepted for international law. Often, the Nuremberg trials are called "the court of history", as it had a very significant impact on the final victory over Nazism in the minds and hearts of people. The atmosphere of the strictest legality was observed, there was no case when the crimes of the defendants were mitigated at some stage of the case. To this day, the Nuremberg Trials are the benchmark model for conducting international war crimes cases.

At the Nuremberg Tribunal

Nuremberg Trials - International Leaders Trial fascist Germany, the leaders of the National Socialist German Workers' Party, through whose fault it was started, which resulted in the death of millions of people, the destruction of entire states, accompanied by terrible atrocities, crimes against humanity, genocide

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

The defendants

G. Goering - Minister of Aviation in Nazi Germany. At the trial: "The winner is always the judge, and the loser is the accused!"
R. Hess - SS Obergruppenfuehrer, Hitler's deputy for the party, third person in the hierarchy of the Third Reich: "I don't regret anything"
J. von Ribbentrop - German Foreign Minister: "The charges were brought against the wrong people"
V. Keitel - Chief of Staff of the Supreme Command of the Armed Forces of Germany: "An order for a soldier is always an order!"
E. Kaltenbrunner - SS Obergruppenfuehrer, Head of the Main Directorate of Imperial Security (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 ersatz Himmler."
A. Rosenberg - the main ideologist of the Third Reich, head of the department foreign policy NSDAP, authorized by the Fuhrer on moral and philosophical education of the NSDAP: “I reject the 'conspiracy' charge. Anti-Semitism was only a necessary defensive measure "
G. Frank - Governor General of Occupied Poland, Reich Minister of Justice of the Third Reich: "I see this process as a high court pleasing to God, designed to sort out the terrible period of Hitler's rule and complete it."
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, ideologue of racism: "This process -"
V. Funk - Minister of Economy of Germany, President of the Reichsbank: “Never in my life have I undertaken anything consciously or unknowingly that would give grounds for such accusations. If I, out of ignorance or due to delusion, committed the acts listed in the indictment, then my guilt should be viewed from the perspective of my personal tragedy, but not as a crime. "
K. Dönitz - Grand Admiral, Commander of the Submarine Fleet, Commander-in-Chief of the Navy of Nazi Germany: “None of the charges have anything to do with me. American inventions! "
E. Raeder - Grand Admiral, Commander-in-Chief of the Navy
B. von Schirach - party and youth leader, Reich Youth Leader, Gauleiter of Vienna, Obergruppenführer SA: "All troubles are from racial politics"
F. Sauckel - one of the main responsible for organizing the use of forced labor in Nazi Germany, Gauleiter of Thuringia, Obergruppenführer SA, Obergruppenführer SS: "The chasm between the ideal of a socialist society, nurtured and defended by me, a sailor and a worker in the past, and these terrible events - the concentration camps - shook me deeply."
A. Jodl - Chief of the Operational Headquarters of the High Command of the Wehrmacht, Colonel General: "The mixture of just accusations and political propaganda is deplorable."
A. Seiss-Inquart - SS Obergruppenfuehrer, minister without portfolio in the government of Hitler, Reich Commissioner of the Netherlands: "I would like to hope that this is the last act of the tragedy of World War II"
A. Speer - Hitler's personal architect, Reich Minister of Armaments and Ammunition: “The process is necessary. Even an authoritarian state does not relieve each individual of responsibility for the horrible crimes they have committed. "
K. von Neurath - German Foreign Minister and Reich Protector of Bohemia and Moravia (1939-1943), SS Obergruppenführer: "I have always been against accusations with no possible defense."
G. Fritsche - Head of the Press and Broadcasting Department at the Ministry of Propaganda: “This is a terrible 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 at all why I was charged ”
R. Lei (hanged himself before the start of the trial) - Reichsleiter, SA Obergruppenfuehrer, head of the organizational department of the NSDAP, head of the German Labor Front
G. Krupp (was declared terminally ill, and his case was suspended) - industrialist and financial magnate who provided significant material support to the Nazi movement
M. Bormann (sued in absentia, because he disappeared and was not found) - SS Obergruppenfuehrer, SA Standartenfuehrer, personal secretary and closest associate 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 global 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 atheism and totalitarianism are to blame for everything. It was they who turned Hitler into a pathological liar "

Judges

Lord Justice Jeffrey Lawrence (UK) - 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 in France

Chief Prosecutors

Roman Rudenko - Prosecutor General of the Ukrainian SSR
Robert Jackson - member of the federal supreme court USA
Hartley Shawcross - UK Attorney General
Charles Dubost, François de Menton, Champaigne de Ribes (alternately) - representatives of France

Attorneys

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

Dr. Exner - Professor of Criminal Law, Advocate for A. Jodl
G. Yarrais is a specialist in the field of international and constitutional law. protector of government
Dr. R. Dix - head of the German Bar Association, defender J. Schacht
Dr. Kranzbüller - Judge in the German Navy, defender of K. Dönitz
O. Stammer - lawyer, defender of Goering
Other

Accusations

crimes against peace: unleashing a war to establish world domination of Germany
war crimes: the murder and torture of prisoners of war, the hijacking of the civilian population to Germany, the murder of hostages, the plunder and destruction of cities and villages of the 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 German state organizations SS, SD, Gestapo and the leadership of the Nazi party were also recognized by the court as criminal

Chronicle of the Nuremberg Trials, Briefly

1942, October 14 - the statement of the Soviet government: "... considers it necessary to immediately bring to justice a special international tribunal and punish any of the leaders of Nazi 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 "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" published in Pravda
1945, 31 May-4 June - London Experts' Conference on the Punishment of Axis War Criminals, 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 the main war criminals, in accordance with which the International Military Tribunal was established.
1945, August 29 - The list of the main war criminals, consisting of 24 names, is published
1945, October 18 - the indictment is served on the International Military Tribunal and through its secretariat transferred to each of the accused
1945, November 20 - the beginning of the process
1945 November 25 - Labor Front head Robert Ley committed suicide in his cell
1945, November 29 - demonstration during the session of the tribunal of the documentary film "Concentration Camps", which included, among other things, German newsreel footage filmed in the camp Auschwitz, 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 trial to be fair, and the guilt of the defendants was undeniable
1946, October 1 - the verdict of the accused
1946, April 11 - During interrogation, Kaltenbruner denies his knowledge of what is happening in the death camps: “I have nothing to do with this. I did not give any orders, nor did I carry out other people's orders on this matter "
1946, October 15 - the head of the prison, Colonel Andrews, announced the results of the consideration of their petitions to the convicted, at 22:45 Goering, sentenced to death, was poisoned
1946, October 16 - execution of criminals sentenced to death

2015 is going down in history - the seventieth year since the end of World War II. Hundreds of articles, documents, photographs dedicated to the holy anniversary were published by Rodina this year. And we decided to devote the December issue of our "Scientific Library" to some of the results and long-term consequences of the Second World War.
Of course, this does not mean that the military theme will disappear from the pages of Motherland along with the anniversary year. A June issue is already planned, which will be dedicated to the 75th anniversary of the beginning of the Great Patriotic War, analytical materials from prominent Russian and foreign scientists are waiting in the editorial portfolio, letters about native front-line soldiers continue to come for the heading "" ...
Write to us, dear readers. There are still many unfilled shelves in our "Scientific Library".

Rodina editorial staff

Open trials of the Nazis

The history of World War II is an endless list of war crimes of Nazi Germany and its allies. For this, the main war criminals were openly judged by mankind in their lair - Nuremberg (1945-1946) and Tokyo (1946-1948). Because of its political-legal significance and cultural footprint, the Nuremberg Tribunal has become a symbol of justice. In its shadow remained other show trials of the countries of Europe over the Nazis and their accomplices and, first of all, open trials held on the territory of the Soviet Union.

For the most cruel war crimes in 1943-1949, trials took place in 21 affected cities of five Soviet republics: Krasnodar, Krasnodon, Kharkov, Smolensk, Bryansk, Leningrad, Nikolaev, Minsk, Kiev, Velikiye Luki, Riga, Stalino (Donetsk), Bobruisk, Sevastopol, Chernigov, Poltava, Vitebsk, Chisinau, Novgorod, Gomel, Khabarovsk. They were publicly condemned 252 war criminals from Germany, Austria, Hungary, Romania, Japan and several of their accomplices from the USSR. Open trials in the USSR over war criminals carried not only the legal sense of punishing the guilty, but also political and anti-fascist. So they made films about the meetings, published books, wrote reports - for millions of people around the world. Judging by the reports of the MGB, almost the entire population supported the accusation and wished the accused the most severe punishment.

At the show trials of 1943-1949. the best investigators, qualified translators, authoritative experts, professional lawyers, and talented journalists worked. About 300-500 spectators came to the meetings (the halls could no longer fit), thousands more stood on the street and listened to radio broadcasts, millions read reports and brochures, tens of millions watched newsreels. Under the weight of evidence, almost all of the suspects confessed to what they had done. In addition, there were only those in the dock whose guilt was repeatedly confirmed by evidence and witnesses. The sentences of these courts can be considered justified even by modern standards, so none of the convicts was rehabilitated. But, despite the importance of open processes, modern researchers know too little about them. The main problem is the unavailability of sources. The materials of each trial amounted to up to fifty extensive volumes, but they were hardly published 1, since they are stored in the archives former offices The KGB has not yet been fully declassified. The culture of memory is also lacking. A large museum opened in Nuremberg in 2010, which organizes exhibitions and methodically examines the Nuremberg Tribunal (and 12 subsequent Nuremberg Trials). But in the post-Soviet space, there are no such museums about local processes. Therefore, in the summer of 2015, the author of these lines created a kind of virtual museum "Soviet Nuremberg" 2 for the Russian Military Historical Society. This site, which caused a great resonance in the media, contains information and rare materials about 21 open courts in the USSR in 1943-1949.

Justice in war

Until 1943, no one in the world had the experience of trying the Nazis and their accomplices. There was no analogue of such cruelty in world history, there were no atrocities of such a time and geographical scale, therefore there were no legal norms for retaliation - neither in international conventions, nor in national criminal codes. In addition, for justice it was still necessary to free the scenes of crimes and witnesses, to capture the criminals themselves. The Soviet Union was the first to do all this, but also not immediately.

From 1941 until the end of the occupation, open trials were held in partisan detachments and brigades - over traitors, spies, looters. They were watched by the partisans themselves and later by residents of neighboring villages. On the front, traitors and Nazi executioners were punished by military tribunals until the issuance of decree N39 of the Presidium of the Supreme Soviet of the USSR of April 19, 1943 "On measures of punishment for German fascist villains guilty of murder and torture of the Soviet civilian population and captured Red Army soldiers, for spies, traitors to the motherland. from among Soviet citizens and for their accomplices. " According to the Decree, cases of the murder of prisoners of war and civilians were filed with the military-field courts at divisions and corps. Many of their meetings, on the recommendation of the command, were open, with the participation of the local population. In military tribunals, guerrilla, people's and field-military courts, the accused defended themselves, without lawyers. Hanging in public was a frequent verdict.

Decree N39 became the legal basis for systemic responsibility for thousands of crimes. The evidence base was detailed reports on the scale of atrocities and destruction in the liberated territories, for this, by a decree of the Presidium of the Supreme Soviet of November 2, 1942, an "Extraordinary State Commission was established to establish and investigate the atrocities of the German fascist invaders and their accomplices and the damage they caused to citizens," collective farms, public organizations, state enterprises and institutions of the USSR. "

The open trials of 1943 in Krasnodar and Kharkov were widely known. These were the first full-fledged trials of the Nazis and their accomplices in the world. The Soviet Union tried to provide a world resonance: the sessions were covered by foreign journalists and the best writers of the USSR (A. Tolstoy, K. Simonov, I. Ehrenburg, L. Leonov), filmed by cameramen and photographers. The whole Soviet Union followed the processes - the reports of the meetings were published in the central and local press, the reaction of readers was also posted there. Brochures were published on the processes at different languages, they were read aloud in the army and in the rear. Almost immediately, the documentaries "The People's Sentence" and "The Court Is Coming" were released, they were shown in Soviet and foreign cinemas. And in 1945-1946 the documents of the Krasnodar trial on "gas chambers" ("gas vans") were used by the international tribunal in Nuremberg.

According to the principle of "collective guilt"

The most thorough investigation was carried out in the framework of ensuring open trials of war criminals in late 1945 - early 1946. in the eight most affected cities of the USSR. According to the directives of the government, special operational-investigative groups of the UMVD-NKGB were created on the ground, they studied the archives, acts of the ChGK, photographic documents, interrogated thousands of witnesses from different regions and hundreds of prisoners of war. The first seven such trials (Bryansk, Smolensk, Leningrad, Velikiye Luki, Minsk, Riga, Kiev, Nikolaev) sentenced 84 war criminals (most of them were hanged). Thus, in Kiev, the hanging of twelve Nazis on Kalinin Square (now Maidan Nezalezhnosti) was seen and approved by more than 200,000 citizens.

Since these trials coincided with the beginning of the Nuremberg Tribunal, they were compared not only by newspapers, but also by the prosecution and defense. Thus, in Smolensk, the public prosecutor L.N. Smirnov built a chain of crimes from the Nazi leaders accused in Nuremberg to specific 10 executioners in the dock: "Both of them are participants in the same complicity." Kaznacheev's lawyer (by the way, he also worked at the Kharkov trial) also spoke about the connection between the criminals of Nuremberg and Smolensk, but with a different conclusion: "An equal sign cannot be put between all these persons."

Eight Soviet trials of 1945-1946 ended, and the Nuremberg Tribunal ended. But among the millions of prisoners of war, there were still thousands of war criminals. Therefore, in the spring of 1947, by agreement between the Minister of the Interior S. Kruglov and the Minister of Foreign Affairs V. Molotov, preparations began for the second wave of show trials against German servicemen. The next nine trials in Stalino (Donetsk), Sevastopol, Bobruisk, Chernigov, Poltava, Vitebsk, Novgorod, Chisinau and Gomel, held by the resolution of the Council of Ministers on September 10, 1947, sentenced 137 people to terms in Vorkutlag.

The last open trial of foreign war criminals was the Khabarovsk trial of 1949 over Japanese developers of biological weapons, who tested them on Soviet and Chinese citizens (more on this on page 116 - Ed.). On The International Tribunal in Tokyo, these crimes were not investigated, as some potential defendants received immunity from the United States in exchange for test data.

Since 1947, instead of separate open processes, the Soviet Union began to massively conduct closed ones. Already on November 24, 1947, the order of the USSR Ministry of Internal Affairs, the USSR Ministry of Justice, the USSR Prosecutor's Office N 739/18/15/311 was issued, according to which it was ordered to consider cases of those accused of committing war crimes at closed meetings of the military tribunals of the Ministry of Internal Affairs troops at the place of detention of the defendants (that is, practically without calling witnesses) without the participation of the parties and sentencing the perpetrators to imprisonment for 25 years in forced labor camps.

The reasons for the curtailment of open processes are not completely clear, no arguments have yet been found in the declassified documents. However, several versions can be put forward. Presumably, the open processes were enough to satisfy the society, the propaganda switched to new tasks. In addition, the conduct of open trials required high qualifications of investigators, they were not enough in the field in the conditions of the post-war personnel shortage. It is also worth considering the material support of open processes (the estimate for one process was about 55 thousand rubles), for the post-war economy these were significant amounts. Closed courts made it possible to quickly and en masse consider cases, sentence the defendants to a predetermined term of imprisonment, and, finally, corresponded to the traditions of Stalinist jurisprudence. In closed trials, prisoners of war were often tried on the principle of "collective guilt", without concrete evidence of personal involvement. Therefore, in the 1990s, the Russian authorities rehabilitated 13,035 foreigners convicted under Decree N39 for war crimes (in total, in 1943-1952, at least 81,780 people were convicted by the Decree, including 24,069 foreign prisoners of war) 4.

Statute of limitations: protests and disagreements

After Stalin's death, all foreigners convicted in closed and open trials were transferred in 1955-1956 to the authorities of their countries. This was not advertised in the USSR - the residents of the affected cities, who well remembered the speeches of the prosecutors, clearly would not have understood such political agreements.

Only a few who came from Vorkuta were imprisoned in foreign prisons (this was the case in the GDR and Hungary, for example), because the USSR did not send investigative cases with them. Walked " cold war", the Soviet and West German judiciary did not cooperate much in the 1950s. And those who returned to the FRG often said that they had been slandered and that confessions of guilt in open trials had been knocked out by torture. then - even enter the political and military elite.

At the same time, part of West German society (primarily young people who themselves did not find the war) sought to seriously overcome the Nazi past. Under pressure from society in the late 1950s, open trials of war criminals were held in the Federal Republic of Germany. They determined the creation in 1958 of the Central Department of Justice of the Lands of the Federal Republic of Germany for the prosecution of Nazi crimes. The main goals of his activity were the investigation of crimes and the identification of persons involved in crimes who can still be prosecuted. When the perpetrators are identified and it is established under the competence of which prosecutor's office they fall, the Central Office ends its preliminary investigation and forwards the case to the prosecutor's office.

Nevertheless, even the identified criminals could be acquitted by the West German court. In accordance with the post-war Criminal Code of the Federal Republic of Germany, most of the crimes of the Second World War in the mid-1960s should have expired. Moreover, the twenty-year statute of limitations extended only to murders committed with extreme cruelty. In the first post-war decade, a number of amendments were made to the Code, according to which those guilty of war crimes, who did not directly participate in their execution, could be acquitted.

In June 1964, a "conference of democratic jurists" gathered in Warsaw strongly protested against the application of the statute of limitations to Nazi crimes. On December 24, 1964, the Soviet government issued a similar declaration. The note dated January 16, 1965 accused the FRG of seeking to completely abandon the persecution of the Nazi executioners. The articles published in Soviet publications on the occasion of the twentieth anniversary of the Nuremberg Tribunal 5 spoke of the same thing.

The situation seems to have changed the resolution of the 28th session of the UN General Assembly of December 3, 1973 "Principles of international cooperation in relation to the detection, arrest, extradition and punishment of persons guilty of war crimes and crimes against humanity." According to its text, all war criminals were subject to search, arrest, extradition to those countries where they committed their atrocities, regardless of the time. But even after the resolution, foreign countries were extremely reluctant to hand over their citizens to Soviet justice. Motivating by the fact that the evidence from the USSR was sometimes shaky, because many years have passed.

In general, due to political obstacles, the USSR in the 1960s-1980s tried in open trials not foreign war criminals, but their accomplices. For political reasons, the names of the punishers hardly sounded at the open trials of 1945-1947 over their foreign owners. Even the trial of Vlasov was held behind closed doors. Because of this secrecy, many traitors with blood in their hands were missed. After all, the orders of the Nazi organizers of the executions were willingly carried out by ordinary traitors from the Ostbatalions, Yagdkommands, and nationalist formations. Thus, at the Novgorod trial of 1947, Colonel V. Findaizen 6, the coordinator of the punitive forces from the Shelon battalion, was tried. In December 1942, the battalion drove all the inhabitants of the villages of Bychkovo and Pochinok onto the ice of the Polist River and shot them. The punishers concealed their guilt, and the investigation was unable to link the cases of hundreds of Sheloni executioners with the case of V. Findaisen. Without understanding, they were given general terms for traitors and, together with everyone, were amnestied in 1955. The punishers fled in all directions, and only then the personal guilt of each was gradually investigated from 1960 to 1982 in a series of open trials 7. It was not possible to catch all of them, but the punishment could overtake them back in 1947.

There are fewer and fewer witnesses, and every year the already unlikely chance of a full investigation of the atrocities of the occupiers and the holding of open trials is decreasing. However, such crimes have no statute of limitations, so historians and lawyers need to search for data and prosecute all still living suspects.

Notes (edit)
1. One of the exceptions is the publication of materials of the Riga trial from the Central Archives of the FSB of Russia (ASD NN-18313, v. 2. LL. 6-333) in the book of Kantor Yu.Z. Baltics: war without rules (1939-1945). SPb., 2011.
2. For more details see the project "Soviet Nuremberg" on the website of the Russian Military Historical Society http://histrf.ru/ru/biblioteka/Soviet-Nuremberg.
3. The trial in the case of the German fascist atrocities in the city of Smolensk and the Smolensk region, meeting on December 19 // News of the Soviets of Working People's Deputies of the USSR, N 297 (8907) of December 20, 1945, p. 2.
4. Epifanov AE Responsibility for war crimes committed on the territory of the USSR during the Great Patriotic War. 1941 - 1956 Volgograd, 2005.S. 3.
5. Voisin V. "" Au nom des vivants ", de Leon Mazroukho: une rencontre entre discours officiel et hommage personnel" // Kinojudaica. Les representations des Juifs dans le cinema russe et sovietique / dans V. Pozner, N. Laurent (dir.). Paris, Nouveau Monde editions, 2012, P. 375.
6. For more details, see D. Astashkin. Open trial of Nazi criminals in Novgorod (1947) // Novgorod historical collection. V. Novgorod, 2014. Issue. 14 (24). S. 320-350.
7. Archive of the FSB administration in the Novgorod region. D. 1/12236, D. 7/56, D. 1/13364, D. 1/13378.