Hostname: page-component-7479d7b7d-767nl Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-10T00:02:29.982Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Judging Nuremberg: The Laws, the Rallies, the Trials

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 March 2019

Tobias Lock  and
Julia Riem

Extract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

The 60th anniversary of the trial against the major war criminals of World War II before the International Military Tribunal Trial (IMT) in Nuremberg was the subject matter of an international conference held in Nuremberg from Sunday, July 17 to Wednesday, July 20, 2005. The conference was presented by Touro College Jacob D. Fuchsberg Law Center, Institute on the Holocaust and the Law, Huntington, USA, in association with the Foundation “Remembrance, Responsibility and Future” – “Remembrance and Future” Fund, supported, amongst others, by the Higher Regional Court of Nuremberg, the Faculty of Law, Friedrich-Alexander University, Erlangen-Nuremberg and the German-American Lawyers’ Association.

The pre-conference session was opened by the President of the Nuremberg Higher Regional Court, Dr. Stefan Franke, who welcomed the audience in “the room where world history was made”, the original setting of the IMT in courtroom 600 at the Nuremberg Palace of Justice. He was followed by Prof. Dr. Mathias Rohe (Dean of Law, Friedrich-Alexander University, Erlangen-Nuremberg), who, as a sign of remembrance, read out a list of those members of the University who were deprived of their doctorates during the Third Reich.

Type
Developments
Information
German Law Journal , Volume 6 , Issue 12 , 01 December 2005 , pp. 1819 - 1832
Copyright
Copyright © 2005 by German Law Journal GbR 

References

1 An argument in which the accuser is accused of a similar offense or behavior.Google Scholar

2 The legal principle that penal law cannot be enacted retroactively.Google Scholar

3 Kellog-Briand Pact, 27 August 1928, Articles I and II.Google Scholar

4 RGBl. I, p. 1146.Google Scholar

5 Luxembourg Agreement, 10 September 1952, UNTS Vol. 162, 205.Google Scholar

6 Agreement on German External Debts, 27 February 1953, UNTS Vol. 224, 13; Vol. 330, 217.Google Scholar

7 Treaty on the Final Settlement with Respect to Germany, 12 September 1990, UNTS 1696, 124; ILM 1186 (1990).Google Scholar

8 Kapos were trustee inmates, sometimes Jewish, who carried out the will of the Nazi camp commandants and guards.Google Scholar

9 Att.-Gen. of the Government of Israel v. Eichmann (1961) 36 I. L. R. 5.Google Scholar

10 War Crimes Act 1945 (Cth), No. 48, 1945.Google Scholar

11 UNTS 213, 221.Google Scholar

12 See also his article in AJIL Vol. 99, 2005, p. 370.Google Scholar

13 Art. 13 ICC Statute.Google Scholar

14 Legal Consequences of the Construction of a Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory (Advisory opinion), 9 July 2004, 43 I.L.M. (2004), 1009.Google Scholar

15 Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War, 12 August 1949, UNTS, Vol. 75, 287.Google Scholar

16 Art. 7 ICC Statute.Google Scholar

17 Prosecutor v Dusko Tadic, ICTY, Case No.: IT-94-1-T.Google Scholar

18 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, 17 July 1998, UNTS No. 38544.Google Scholar

19 S. 78 of the German Criminal Code (StGB).Google Scholar