Nuremberg: Procedural due process at the International Military Tribunal

<p>For over sixty years, lawyers and historians have discussed the credibility and repercussions of the Nuremberg Trial (1945–1946). This paper argues that the defendants’ procedural due process rights were partially protected at Nuremberg, although there were gross breaches of particular fundamental due process rights. The Nuremberg Trial at the International Military Tribunal was conducted by the four Allied Powers to try the upper echelon Nazi war criminals following the Second World War. The London Charter, drafted by the Allies, outlined the trial procedure to be adopted, and provided certain guarantees in attempt to secure a fair trial for the twenty-two defendants. This paper examines the history of fundamental due process rights (recognised in both continental Europe and common law jurisdictions) and analyses the extent to which these rights were breached at Nuremberg. This paper further argues that despite the defendants being afforded more rights than they could have expected given the circumstances, such breaches significantly compromised the integrity of the trial.</p>

Nuremberg: Procedural due process at the International Military Tribunal

<p>For over sixty years, lawyers and historians have discussed the credibility and repercussions of the Nuremberg Trial (1945–1946). This paper argues that the defendants’ procedural due process rights were partially protected at Nuremberg, although there were gross breaches of particular fundamental due process rights. The Nuremberg Trial at the International Military Tribunal was conducted by the four Allied Powers to try the upper echelon Nazi war criminals following the Second World War. The London Charter, drafted by the Allies, outlined the trial procedure to be adopted, and provided certain guarantees in attempt to secure a fair trial for the twenty-two defendants. This paper examines the history of fundamental due process rights (recognised in both continental Europe and common law jurisdictions) and analyses the extent to which these rights were breached at Nuremberg. This paper further argues that despite the defendants being afforded more rights than they could have expected given the circumstances, such breaches significantly compromised the integrity of the trial.</p>

International individual obligations and international responsibilities of individuals

Depending on the state, an individual may not have the procedural capacity to appeal to the Court, but as a result of changes in the international community, they have gained the right to sue in international courts. This development is a factor that will be taken into account in all research on the international subjectivity of the individual. Key words: International individual obligations, legal sanctions, UN Charter, legal responsibility, international military tribunal

Le génocide des nazis dans les témoignages des interprètes et traducteurs au procès de Nuremberg

The Nuremberg Trial is of paramount importance, first of all, in historic and legal terms, as it laid the foundations for an international justice system that had no precedent in history, but also in linguistic terms, as it marks the very beginning of simultaneous interpretation and the modern profession of interpreting. By analysing the testimonies of those exceptional interpreters who were ensuring the communication in four languages before the International Military Tribunal in Nuremberg, we will highlight the linguistic and technical challenges they were facing as well as the deeply personal struggles they had to overcome, in particular on a psychological and ethical level, while taking part in a worldwide historic event. The aim of this article is to deepen the current state of research on simultaneous interpretation, but above all to pay tribute to these remarkable interpreters and translators who made history with their pioneering work and their legendary accomplishments in Nuremberg.

Introduction

This chapter introduces the book’s consideration of how international criminal courts have confronted the past in different institutional contexts. The chapter provides a chapter-by-chapter overview of the book’s central themes and arguments. The book is concerned with the historical function of international criminal courts—their role in the construction of historical narratives concerning both the culpability of the accused on trial and the broader mass atrocity context in which they are alleged to have participated. This historical function raises a number of questions concerning the scope and content of the historical narratives constructed within international criminal judgments, the actors that exert influence over such processes, and the extent to which such histories are consistent and authoritative both within and beyond the courtroom. This book aims to address these questions by examining how the past has been confronted within three sets of international criminal courts: first, the International Military Tribunal at Nuremberg and the International Military Tribunal for the Far East at Tokyo; second, the United Nations ad hoc tribunals, namely the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia, the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda, and the Special Court for Sierra Leone; and finally, the International Criminal Court. By critically examining the scope and content of the histories constructed within the judgments of these courts and by surfacing the influence of different actors and contexts over the precise orientation of judicial narratives, this book seeks to develop a deeper understanding of the emancipatory potential and limits of international criminal courts across different institutional settings.