"Studying the Holocaust changed the way I make decisions." - Student

Tuesday, July 3, 2012

Congrats Natalie!

Natalie Pilgeram, of Mt. Spokane High School in Mead, WA received 2nd Place in the National History Day (national) competition for her paper, "The Trial of the Century: A Reaction to Nazi Atrocities Prompts Revolution and Reform in Principles of International Law." Natalie interviewed Seattle-area Holocaust survivor Bob H. for part of her research. Congratulations Natalie!

The research I carried out on this topic not only brought me into contact with some wonderful people whom I never would have met otherwise, but left me with an awareness of the varied issues surrounding the Holocaust that I will always carry with me.  I never expected that this project would take me this far.  Those hours and days after I learned I had placed at nationals were an incredible whirlwind experience that I still don’t think I have fully processed!
-Natalie Pilergeram

The following is the text from the first page of Natalie's essay.


The Trial of the Century: A Reaction to Nazi Atrocities Prompts Revolution and Reform in Principles of International Law

             In November of 1945, Lena Kaplan of Minneapolis received a letter from her husband: “Here we are on the eve of the opening of the second most important trial in the history of the world (No. 1: the trial of Jesus Christ),” he wrote.  “Tomorrow morning the trial opens…and from that point on we’re in the soup.”[1]  The letter came from the bombed out city of Nuremberg, Germany, and Lena Kaplan’s husband was a senior attorney on the United States prosecutorial staff for Case Number One of the International Military Tribunal (I.M.T) - the Nuremberg Trial. As a historically unique reaction to the crimes of the Nazi regime, this trial prompted reform in principles of international law and ultimately a revolution in the way sovereign nations interact in the legal realm.
The “soup” Kaplan referred to lasted from November 20, 1945 to October 1, 1946 and tried twenty-two defendants, including one in absentia.  Their crimes were those that could not be restricted to any particular geographic location.  They fell under four counts:  crimes against peace, war crimes, crimes against humanity, and participation in the “common plan” or conspiracy to commit those crimes.[2]  The Allies endeavored to handpick high-level defendants from every gear of the National Socialist machine, creating a roster that would serve to establish the criminality of the organizations represented (a key objective of the American delegation especially).  Of the defendants convicted in the end, twelve were sentenced to hang.  Three were fully acquitted.  (see Appendix I)  Control Council Law No. 10, formalized in December of 1945, guided subsequent trials of lower level defendants carried out by individual Allied nations (primarily the United States) in their respective occupied zones.[3]  These trials explored the culpabilities of an eclectic assortment of defendants: concentration camp leaders, medical experimenters, unjust Nazi judges, and even industrialists who supplied Zyklon B to gas chambers.[4]
The Palace of Justice in Nuremberg was selected as the seat of the I.M.T. largely for symbolic reasons.  The trial of the century would play out in the city where the annual rallies of the Nazi Party had spurred the German people into a militant nationalistic frenzy, the city that lent its name to the “Nuremberg Decrees” that began the creeping policy of Jewish persecution.[5]  The connection was clear.  Twenty-one countries prosecuted the Nazi officials (with France, the United States, Great Britain, and the Soviet Union actually sending representative judges),[6] but chief American prosecutor Justice Robert H. Jackson would argue in his opening address to the tribunal, “The real complaining party at your bar is Civilization.”[7] 


[1] Barrett, John Q. "The Nuremberg Roles of Justice Robert H. Jackson." Washington University Global Studies Law Review. 6. (2007): 512-513.

[2] "Indictment." Nuremberg Trial Proceedings 1. The Avalon Project. Web. 9 Feb 2012.

>.

[3] "Memorandum, Control Council Law No. 10: Punishment of Persons Guilty of War Crimes, Crimes against Peace and against Humanity." 07 Jan 1946. 1-4. Harry S. Truman Library and Museum. Web. 30 Mar 2012.

[4] And in April of 1946, the International Military Tribunal for the Far East opened the “Tokyo War Crimes Trial” of twenty-eight Japanese military and civilian leaders.  With its eleven nation judgment team, two and a half year span, and fifty-five counts, it was much more complex than the Nuremberg Trial.  Its successful impact from the Allied perspective was less obvious (four of the eleven judges dissented), although it is still referenced as another landmark in the development of international law.

[5] Maguire, Peter. Law and War: An American Story. New York: Columbia University, 2000. 108.

[6] "Charter of the International Military Tribunal." Nuremberg Trial Proceedings 1. The Avalon Project. Web. 9 Feb 2012. .

[7] Jackson, Robert H. "Opening Statement before the International Military Tribunal." Nuremberg Trial Proceedings 2. The Avalon Project. Web. 9 Feb 2012.

No comments:

Post a Comment