Abstract
A study of the efforts undertaken by the United Nations to make the law recognized and applied by the Nuremberg Tribunal generally applicable, has necessarily a different character from that of the judgment itself. The latter and the judgments of the other post-war tribunals discussed above can be considered as accomplished facts. The work of the United Nations relative to these Judgments is still, however, at the present moment, after the Sixth Session of the General Assembly, in full development. Apart from the affirmation by unanimous resolution of the General Assembly of “the principles of international law recognized by the Charter of the Nürnberg Tribunal and the Judgment of the Tribunal” on December 11, 1946, and apart from the formulation of these principles by the International Law Commission during its Second Session, in June and July 1950, no positive steps have been taken in this field and no definite conclusions can be drawn.
Keywords
- International Criminal Court
- International Crime
- Universal Jurisdiction
- International Tribunal
- Special Rapporteur
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsPreview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Department of State Bulletin (1946), Vol. 15, pp. 954-957.
Ibidem, p. 954.
Biddle, Revue International de Droit Pénal, l.c., p. 7.
Schick, l.c., p. 794; Finch, l.c., p. 26.
See discussion in the Sixth Committee at the Fifth Session of the General Assembly, concerning Part III of the Report of the International Law Commission, in U.N. Documents A/C. 6/SR. 233-239, A/C. 6/SR. 235, pp. 165-6 (Delegates of Venezuela and Argentina).
A/C. 6/SR. 237, p. 181.
Prof. Mr. B. V. A. Röling, Stand en Ontwikkeling van het internationaal strafrecht, Tijdschrift voor Strafrecht, 1951, pp. 1 ff., p. 2.
See above, pp. 299 and 304 ff..
See particulary the Dutch Delegate in the Sixth Committee, A/C. 6/SR. 232, p. 138 and A/C. 6/SR. 236, p. 172; also Report of the Sixth Committee, A/L 639, p. 12.
See above, pp. 258-260.
An exception has to be made for the statute of the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, Annex to Gen. Ass. Resolution 428 (V) adopted on 14 December 1950, by virtue of which is excluded from the mandate of the High Commissioner a person “in respect of whom there are serious reasons for considering that he has committed a crime mentioned in Article VI of the London Charter of the International Military Tribunal”. The same provision was included in Resolution 429 (V) of the same date, recommending a definition of refugees for the purpose of a draft Convention relating to the status of Refugees. The Convention as adopted by a Conference of Plenipotentaries in Geneva, on 25 July 1951, does not contain any reference to the Charter of London on account of the opposition to such express reference by the German Delegation to the conference. The relevant paragraph (Art. I, par. 1) now gives as criterion the committing of “a crime against peace, a war crime, or a crime against humanity, as defined in the international instrument drawn up to make provision in respect of such crimes”. Article 6 of the London Charter thus remains decisive in this respect (Cf. Prof. Dr. B. V. A. Röling, Internationaal Strafrechterlijke Organisatie, Tijdschrift voor Strafrecht, 1952, reprint p. 5, note 9).
N. Politis, The New Aspects of International Law, o.c., p. 43.
Official Records of the second part of the First Session of the General Assembly, pp. 699-700 (italics supplied).
The Charter and Judgment of the Nuremberg Trial; History and Analysis, A/CN. 4/5 (U.N. Publication 1949/V/7).
Formulation of the Nuremberg Principles, Part III of the Report of the International Law Commission covering its Second Session, A/1316, pp. 11-14.
Cf. Statute of the International Law Commission, Articles 1 and 15, in Gen. Ass. Resolution, 174 (II).
Quoted by J. Spiropoulos in The Formulation of the Nürnberg Principles, report presented to the International Law Commission at its second session, A/CN. 4/22 (12 April 1950), pp. 20-1.
Gen. Ass. Resolution 177 (II) of 21 November 1947.
Official Records of the Second Session of the General Assembly, Sixth Committee, Summary Records of Meetings, 16 Sept.–26 November 1947, p. 212, quoted by Röling in Tijdschrift voor Strafrecht 1951, l.c., p. 7.
A/1316, p. 11, par. 96.
J. Spiropoulos, Draft Code of Offences against the Peace and Security of Mankind, report presented to the I.L.C. at its Second Session, A/CN. 4/25 (26 April 1950), p. 18.
See Prof. Mr. Dr. J. P. A. François, De codificatie van het internationale recht, Economisch-Statistische Berichten, 1949, Nos. 1686 and 1687; reprint pp. 9–10.
See Report of the I.L.C. covering its First Session, A/925, Chapter III, p. 4, par. 27, and Report on Second Session, l.c., p. 11, note 3.
See the criticism of this method in the Sixth Committee of the General Assembly of 1950, Report of the Sixth Committee on the Report of the I.L.C, A/1639, (8 December 1950), p. 9.
See Resolution 174 (II) and François, Vol. I, p. 624.
See the forementioned resolution, and Report of the Sixth Committee. l.c., p. 8.
Gen. Ass. Resolution 488 (V); see Report of the Sixth Committee, l.c., pp. 12-14.
J. Spiropoulos, Second Report on a Draft Code of Offences against the Peace and Security of Mankind, presented to the I.L.C., A/CN. 4/44 (12 April 1951), pp. 6–7.
Report of the I.L.C. covering its Third Session, A/1858, Chapter IV, p. 11, par. 57.
Second Report on a Draft Code, l.c., pp. 7-36.
Report on First Session, l.c., p. 4, par. 26 in fine.
Statement of the Delegate of the United Kingdom, A/C. 6/SR. 233, p. 143.
Report of the Sixth Committee, l.c., p. 10.
Statement of the Dutch Delegate at the 232nd meeting of the Sixth Committee, (A/C. 6/SR. 232), transcript p. 12; cf. Röling in Tijdschrift voor Strafrecht, l.c., p. 11.
Statement of the French Delegate, A/C. 6/SR 232, p. 141, and statement of the Chinese Delegate, A/C. 6/SR. 235, p. 164.
Cf. Statement of the Peruvian Delegate, A/C. 6/SR. 237, pp. 179-180.
Statement of the Soviet Delegate, A/C. 6/SR. 234, p. 156.
Statement of the Delegate of the United Kingdom, A/C. 6/SR. 233, p. 145.
Report of The Sixth Committee, l.c., p. 11.
As the Delegate of Israêl, Mr. Robinson, remarked, A/C. 6/SR. 236, p. 175.
Report of the Sixth Committee, l.c., p. 10.
Formulation of the Nuremberg Principles in Report on Second Session, l.c., p. 12, par. 104.
Ibidem, pars. 105-6.
Report of the Sixth Committee, l.c., p. 11.
Ibidem, pp. 11-12.
See above, pp. 297 and 303 ff..
See above, p. 215.
See above, p. 306.
Report on Second Session, l.c., p. 14, pars. 125-7.
Cf. Report of Sixth Committee, l.c., p. 9.
See for example Röling in Tijdschrift voor Strafrecht, l.c. pp. 10-11.
See Report of Sixth Committee, l.c., pp. 10-11.
Report on Third Session, l.c., Chapter IV, pp. 10-14.
C. G. Fenwick (Draft Code of Offences against the Peace and Security of Mankind, A.J.I.L., 1948, pp. 98-100, p. 100) rather bluntly states with reference to the U.S. Mutual Security Act of 1951: “The terms of the law made the consideration of the Draft Code by the General Assembly wholly impracticable, with the result that the Code was taken off the agenda of the Sixth and postponed until the Seventh Session of the General Assembly”. See also Pitman B. Potter, ibidem, pp. 101-2.
See Observations of Governments on the Draft Code of Offences against the Peace and Security of Mankind and on the Question of the Definition of Aggression (1952), A/2162 and Add. 1.
Report on First Session, l.c., p. 5, par. 30.
Report on Second Session, l.c., p. 17, par. 148.
Ibidem; see for the text of the subcommittee’s draft, Doc. A/CN. 4/R. 6.
See above, p. 336.
Doc. A/CN. 4/19.
Report on Second Session, l.c., p. 17, par. 149. See further Chapter III, section 6 above.
L.c., A/CN. 4/25, p. 15.
Above, p. 322.
See First Report on Draft Code, l.c., pp. 12-13.
Report on Third Session, l.c., p. 11, par. 58.
See Convention on Suppression of Counterfeiting Currency of 1 May 1929, International Legislation, l.c., Vol. IV, pp. 2692 ff..
See above, pp. 217 ff. and 304 ff..
First Report on Draft Code, l.c., p. 24.
Second Report on Draft Code, l.c., p. 40.
See Report on Third Session, Chapter III, pp. 8-10, and above, p. 100.
See above, pp. 99 ff..
See p. 113.
Report on Third Session, l.c., p. 9, pars. 47-48; see above, pp. III ff..
See above, p. 334.
See A. Sottile, Un peu plus de justice S.V.P., R.D.I., 1948, pp. 372–385, pp. 379-381; N. Veicopoulos, Les Responsabilités des individuels dans la préparation de la guerre, ibidem, pp. 53-62. Cf. above, p. 231.
See the judgment in the von Weiszaecker case, quoted above, pp. 233 and 306.
See above, pp. 251-2.
Report on Second Session, l.c., p. 17, par. 156.
Second Report on Draft Code, l.c., p. 45.
Report on Third Session, l.c., p. 11, par. 58.
See Oppenheim-Lauterpacht, Vol. I, p. 307.
See Cowles, Universality of Jurisdiction over War Crimes, l.c., and Janèckzek, o.c., pp. 59 ff..
See on those efforts the Memorandum concerning a Draft Code of Offences against the Peace and Security of Mankind, by V. V. Pella, U. N. General, A/CN. 4/39 (24 November 1950).
Cf. Oppenheim-Lauterpacht, Vol. I, p. 298.
See Judgment in the Lotus case of 1927, Hudson, World Court Reports, Vol. I, pp. 191-206.
Second Report on Draft Code, l.c., p. 46.
See Statute of the International Court of Justice, Art. 36.
See Gen. Ass. Resolution 260 (III) of 9 December 1948, artt. 5, 6 and 9.
The holding of such trials has sometimes been made a condition of a peace-settlement. The history of the Leipzig Trials after the First World War only stresses the difficulties of such municipal trials of war criminals, while the trial of former President Ryti c.s. held in Helsinki in 1946, in fulfilment of the obligation contained in Article 9, paragraph I (a), of the Peace Treaty with Finland of 1947, was rather a doubtful case (the documents of this trial have been published by Hj. H. Procopé, Fällande Dom Som Friar, Stockholm 1946).
First Report on Draft Code, l.c., p. 60.
Report on Second Session, l.c., Part. IV.
Report of Sixth Committee, l.c., pp. 15-18.
See Report to the General Assembly of the Session held 1 August— 31 August 1951 of the Committee on International Criminal Jurisdiction, A/AC. 48/4.
A/AC. 48/4, p. 8.
See on the Draft Statute, George A. Finch in A.J.I.L., 1952, (pp. 89-97) who rejects, and Quincy Wright, ibidem (pp. 60-72), who favours the idea of the establishment of an International Criminal Court. See also Röling, Internationale Strafrechterlijke Organisatie, l.c..
Like the Hague and Geneva Conventions, containing definitions of war crimes, and the Genocide Convention covering — partly — the crimes against humanity.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 1953 Springer Science + Business Media B.V.
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Pompe, C.A. (1953). Implementation of the ‘Nuremberg Principles’. In: Aggressive War. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-011-8821-0_5
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-011-8821-0_5
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-94-011-8177-8
Online ISBN: 978-94-011-8821-0
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive