The Nizkor Project: Remembering the Holocaust (Shoah)

The Trial of Adolf Eichmann
Session 1
(Part 2 of 5)


Holocaust, Adolf Eichmann, Eichmann trial, holocaust, Jewish holocaust
SIXTH COUNT

Nature of the Offence: Crime against humanity, an offence against section 1(a)(2) of the Nazis and Nazi Collaborators (Punishment) Law 5710-1950, and Section 23 of the Criminal Law Ordinance, 1936.

Particulars of the Offence: The Accused in committing the acts described in Counts 1 to 5 persecuted Jews on national, racial,religious and political grounds.

SEVENTH COUNT

Nature of the Offence: Crime against humanity, an offence against Section 1(a)(2) of the Nazis and Nazi Collaborators (Punishment) Law 5710-1950, and Section 23 of the Criminal Law Ordinance, 1936.

Particulars of the Offence: a) During the period of Nazi rule in Germany and the other countries of the Axis, in the occupied countries, and also in the areas which were, in practice, subject to their authority, the Accused, together with others, caused the plunder of the property of millions of Jews who were residents of these countries, by means of inhuman coercion, robbery, terror and torture.

b) Amongst the Accused's deeds were:

(1) The establishment, organization, and management of the "Central Office for Jewish Emigration" (Zentralstelle fuer juedische Auswanderung) in Vienna, immediately following the entry of the Nazis into Austria in the month of March 1938 and until the end of the Second World War, by means of which the Accused transferred the property of the Jews of Austria and of the Jewish communities of that state to German control. This property was in part plundered in order to finance the expulsion of the Jews of Austria beyond the country's borders and in part transferred through coercion to the possession of the authorities by means of terror against the owners thereof.

(2) The establishment of the "Central Office for Jewish Emigration" in Prague following the Nazi invasion of Czechoslovakia in the month of March 1939, and its organization and management by the Accused, until the end of the Second World War, according to the model of the Central Office in Vienna. Through this office a "Special Account" was administered as a channel for the transfer of the property of the Jews whom the Accused, together with others, robbed - within Czechoslovakia itself and in other countries.

(3) The establishment of the Central Office for the Emigration of Jews and for Jewish affairs in Germany (Reichszentrale) in Berlin in the year 1939 and its management by the Accused until the end of the Second World War. By means of this Central Office, following the example of the Central Office in Vienna, the Accused, together with others, plundered the property of the Jews of Germany and the property of their communities by the same means and under the same conditions as he laid down in respect of the offices in Vienna and Prague.

(4) By means of collecting forced payments from persons deported from Germany and the occupied territories, the Accused compelled hundreds of thousands of Jews to finance their deportation to the extermination camps and the sites of other concentrations for mass slaughter. To this end the Accused set up the Special Account "W" which was at the exclusive disposal of his Department.

(5) The property of the Jews slain in the countries of German conquest in Eastern Europe was also plundered by their murderers - the men of the SS. For purposes of centralizing the act of robbery, special operations were organized in the years 1942-1943 within the framework of a special campaign for the slaughter of the Jews of Poland, which was known by the description "Reinhardt Action" (Aktion Reinhardt). The person in charge of this special operation was the Senior Commander of the Security Police and the SD for the district of Lublin. During these two years property estimated at a nominal value of 200 million marks, but the actual value of which amounted to several times this sum, was stolen.

(6) During the Second World War and until shortly before its conclusion, freight trains were dispatched to Germany every month from the areas of occupation in the East, containing the movable property of those murdered in the extermination camps, in the concentration sites and in the ghettos. This property also included enormous quantities of parts of the bodies of those done to death such as hair, gold teeth, false teeth, artificial limbs; furthermore, every other personal item was plundered from the bodies of the Jews before and after their extermination.

(7) The Accused, together with others, planned all the operations of comprehensive robbery so that the property of millions of those brought for extermination might be taken from them and brought to Germany. The extent of his success emerges from the fact that, when at the time of their retreat in January 1945, the Germans burned 29 stores of personal effects and articles of value out of 35 such stores established in the extermination camp at Auschwitz, there were found in the stores that were saved from the fire, inter alia:

348,820 men's suits
836,255 women's costumes
38,000 men's shoes.
c) The Accused carried out the said operations until the end of the year 1939 by virtue of his special duties in the Security Service of the SS (SD); and since the end of that year the Accused: merged these duties with his functions in Office IV of the RSHA.

d) The Accused carried out the robbery of the property of the Jews in Germany and in the other territories of occupation, over and above those already mentioned in this count as aforesaid, by means of issuing instructions to the local commanders of the Security Police and to those in the countries of the Axis and the occupied areas, through the foreign representatives of Germany as described in the First Count.

EIGHTH COUNT

Nature of the Offence: War crime, an offence against Section 1(a)(3) of the Nazis and Nazi Collaborators (Punishment) Law 5710-1950 and Section 23 of the Criminal Law Ordinance, 1936.

Particulars of the Offence: The Accused performed acts, during the period of the Second World War, in Germany and in the other countries of the Axis and also in the occupied territories, which are to be defined as war crimes, when, together with others, he caused the persecution, expulsion and murder of the Jewish population of the countries occupied by the Germans and the other countries of the Axis. The Accused committed these acts in the course of fulfilling his functions as specified in the First Count.

NINTH COUNT

Nature of the Offence: Crime against humanity, an offence against Section 1(a)(2) of the Nazis and Nazi Collaborators (Punishment) Law 5710-1950 and Section 23 of the Criminal Law Ordinance, 1936. Particulars of the Offence: The Accused, between the years 1940 and 1942 committed acts in Poland, which at that time was occupied by Germany, which are to be defined as crimes against humanity when, together with others, he caused the deportation of more than half-a-million Polish civilians from their places of residence, with the intention of settling German families in those places. The displaced Poles were transferred, some to Germany and the territories occupied by her for the purpose of employing them and holding them under conditions of servitude, coercion and terror; some were abandoned in other regions of Poland and the German areas of occupation in the East; some were concentrated in labor camps organized by the SS under inhumane conditions; and some were transferred to Germany and were destined for the purpose of "Germanization" (Rueckverdeutschung). The Accused: committed these acts of his by virtue of a special appointment in the month of December 1939, according to which he was empowered by the Chief of the Security Police in Berlin to act as the person responsible for the "evacuation" of the civilian population.

TENTH COUNT

Nature of the Offence: Crime against humanity, an offence against Section 1(a)(2) of the Nazis and Nazi Collaborators (Punishment) Law 5710-1950, and Section 23 of the Criminal Law Ordinance, 1936.

Particulars of the Offence: a) The Accused committed acts in the year 1941 in Yugoslavia in parts then occupied by Germany, which are to be defined as crimes against humanity when, together with others, he caused the deportation of more than fourteen thousand Slovene civilians from their places of residence, with the intention of settling German families in their stead;

b) The deported Slovenes were transferred to the Serbian province of Yugoslavia by methods of coercion and terror, and under inhuman conditions.

c) The planning of these expulsions was effected by the Accused: at a meeting on 6 May 1941 which took place in Marburg (Untersteiermark) and to which the Accused invited representatives of the other authorities dealing with the matter. The expulsion headquarters continued to be located in that city, and acted in accordance with the directives of the Accused. The Accused: committed these acts by virtue of his special appointment as mentioned in the Ninth Count.

ELEVENTH COUNT

Nature of the Offence: Crime against humanity, an offence against Section 1(a)(2) of the Nazis and Nazi Collaborators (Punishment) Law 5710-1950, and Section 23 of the Criminal Law Ordinance, 1936.

Particulars of the Offence: The Accused: committed acts during the period of the Second World War which are to be defined as crimes against humanity in Germany and the occupied territories when, together with others, he caused the deportation from their places of residence of tens of thousands of gypsies, their assembly in places of concentration, and their dispatch to extermination camps in the areas of the German occupation in the East, for the purpose of murdering them. The Accused committed these acts by virtue of his special appointment as mentioned in the Ninth Count.

TWELFTH COUNT

Nature of the Offence: Crime against humanity, an offence against Section 1(a)(2) of the Nazis and Nazi Collaborators (Punishment) Law, 5710-1950, and Section 23 of the Criminal Law Ordinance, 1936.

Particulars of the Offence: In the year 1942 the Accused committed acts which are to be defined as crimes against humanity when, together with others, he caused the deportation of approximately 100 children, residents of the village of Lidice in Czechoslovakia, their transfer to Poland and their murder there. The Accused committed these acts in the course of fulfilling his functions in the Gestapo in Berlin.

THIRTEETH COUNT

Nature of the Offence: Membership of a hostile organization, an offence against Section 3(a) of the Nazis and Nazi Collaborators (Punishment) Law 5710-1950.

Particulars of the Offence: The Accused, during the period of the Nazi rule in Germany, was a member of the organization known by the name of Schutzstaffeln der NSDAP (SS) and during the course of his service in this organization attained the rank of SS Obersturmbannfuehrer. This body was declared as a criminal organization in the judgment of the International Military Tribunal on 1 October 1946 in accordance with Section 9 of the Charter of the Tribunal which was attached to the Agreement of the Four Powers dated 8 August 1945, in regard to the trial of the major war criminals.

FOURTEENTH COUNT

Nature of the Offence: Membership of a hostile organization, an offence against Section 3(a) of the Nazis and Nazi Collaborators (Punishment) Law, 5710-1950.

Particulars of the Offence: During the period of Nazi rule in Germany, the Accused was a member of an organization known by the name Sicherheitsdienst des Reichsfuehrers SS (SD). This body was declared as a criminal organization in the Judgment of the International Military Tribunal on 1 October 1946 in accordance with Section 9 of the Charter of the Tribunal which was attached to the Agreement of the Four Powers dated 8 August 1945 in regard to the trial of the major war criminals.

FIFTEENTH COUNT

Nature of the Offence: Membership of a hostile organization, an offence against Section 3(a) of the Nazis and Nazi Collaborators (Punishment) Law 5710-1950.

Particulars of the Offence: During the period of Nazi rule in Germany, the Accused was a member of the Secret State Police (Geheime Staatspolizei) known as the "Gestapo" and served therein as Head of the Department for Jewish Affairs. This body was declared as a criminal organization in the Judgement of the International Military Tribunal on 1 October 1946 in accordance with Section 9 of the Charter of the Tribunal which was attached to the Agreement of the Four Powers dated 8 August 1945 in regard to the trial of the major war criminals.

Presiding Judge: Did you understand the indictment?

Accused: Yes, certainly.

Dr. Servatius: I request the permission of the Court to allow me to express an objection, before the Accused answers the question whether he admits guilt or not. I have to voice two reservations. They apply to the fear of prejudice on the part of the judges, and to the lack of competence on the part of the Court. I request the Court to examine whether reasons do not exist in consequence of which one of the judges should be disqualified from sitting in judgment, or whether he himself should declare himself to be prejudiced. The removal of one of the judges is likely to arise out of a situation where one of the judges himself or a near relative of his was harmed by the acts brought forward in the charges. An assumption such as this is quite possible. It arises from the fact that the entire Jewish people were drawn into the holocaust of extermination. The question of whether such facts exist here, thus leading to the removal of one of the judges, must be examined by the Court at the outset.

Furthermore, it follows from the nature of the material of the proceedings that the Accused must be apprehensive concerning the prejudice of the judges. It is not that actual prejudice on the part of the judges is the operative issue; according to the idea of the principle of guaranteeing a fair trial, it is sufficient if there is a justified apprehension on the part of the Accused. I do not voice this apprehension against a particular judge on the grounds that he passed sentence or judgment in a previous process concerning the Accused.

I have not managed to determine anything from the point of view of decisions which may be taken into account which is likely to cause concern in regard to the impartiality of a judge in the case which is before us. The fear of prejudice exists, therefore, against all the judges in equal measure. There are reasons which arise in general from the very material of the proceedings. The fear of prejudice is likely to arise from the fact that the general sphere of interests of one of the judges may be affected in a substantial manner. He would not be able to keep his distance sufficiently to be able to make a decision which would not be influenced by the acts about to be considered.

These apprehensions have also found their expression amongst the public. The President of the Supreme Court in Israel, Justice Olshan, commented on this question in one of his judgments. He said the following...

Presiding Judge: What is the number of the judgment, if you could quote it?

Dr. Servatius: I request permission to produce it later - I have not yet managed to ascertain the number of the judgment. He stated the following

"It is not sufficient that defence counsel, prosecutors and judges should be convinced of the personal impartiality and integrity of the judges. If fear should arise publicly for reasons which can be justified on reasonable grounds, that judges may be prejudiced, that would be sufficient to remove judges from the trial."
The public, in the case before us, is the world. The Court has confirmed this in its previous decision regarding approval of television broadcasts to the world public.

Personalities well-known in world public affairs have raised doubts. They have suggested the setting up of a neutral Court, an international Court or a mixed tribunal. This should have been done. The fear of prejudice also arises out of the following matters. Here we are not talking of a regular criminal process in which consideration must be given to acts which were carried out with an individual criminal inclination. We are talking of the consideration of participation in processes which were political processes. These are acts in the prosecution of which the Israeli State and the Jewish people have a political interest.

To this must be added the influence of the world political press, which has already condemned the Accused: without hearing him. This political interest which is the motivating cause of this trial, is capable of having substantial influence on the judges. The Government has the right to be partial for the sake of its people - it is permitted to be biased. The representation of this right is the right of the prosecutor. But the judges have to test whether they are able to raise themselves, without being influenced, above the material of the trial; they have to examine whether the Accused should not, justifiably, have to be without any concern regarding prejudice on the part of the Court. The absence of any connection with the matter on the part of the Court is the foundation for the subsequent recognition awarded to the judgment.

My second objection refers to the lack of competence of the Court. I propose that the Court adjudge itself as not being competent to consider and to decide on the present indictment. The lack of competence arises from the following points:

Firstly because the law for punishing Nazis and their collaborators contravenes the Law of Nations.

Secondly because the Accused was seized forcibly and kidnapped and brought before the Court.

The law for punishing Nazis and their collaborators of 10 August 1950 seeks to provide punishment in regard to persons and acts before the existence of the State of Israel, outside the present boundaries of the State, which wronged persons who were not residents of the State of Israel.


[ Previous | Index | Next ]

Home ·  Site Map ·  What's New? ·  Search Nizkor

© The Nizkor Project, 1991-2012

This site is intended for educational purposes to teach about the Holocaust and to combat hatred. Any statements or excerpts found on this site are for educational purposes only.

As part of these educational purposes, Nizkor may include on this website materials, such as excerpts from the writings of racists and antisemites. Far from approving these writings, Nizkor condemns them and provides them so that its readers can learn the nature and extent of hate and antisemitic discourse. Nizkor urges the readers of these pages to condemn racist and hate speech in all of its forms and manifestations.