Mr Wear has published several articles like this which he believes prove how unjust the Nuremberg trials were. They consist of the opinions of men, women and editorials mainly from the US or UK.
The Nuremberg Trials were not perfect, nor could they be, as they were dealing with events unprecedented in modern history. The formalities and technicalities of the trials are often criticised, generally by US sources unaccustomed to European legal procedures.
The main question is: were the Nuremberg Trials actually fair? The best people to answer this question have to be the Germans themselves. After all the defendants were German and the trials took place in Germany with many German defense lawyers.
In 1955 a book called “Nuremberg: German Views of the War Trials.” was produced, a review of which can be found here:
by Charles A Horsky.
The book contains letters and statements by many of the German defense attorneys in relation to the Nuremberg Trials. The following paragraph sums up the attitude of German lawyers to the trials:
There is also abundant evidence that the trials were conducted with impartiality
and a sense of justice-that they were trials in the real sense. “Nobody
dares to doubt,” says one attorney,3 that the International Military
Tribunal “was guided by the search for truth and justice from the first to the
last day of this tremendous trial.” Or, as Dr. Ehard puts it, “Within the framework
set by the Charter all participants were obviously endeavoring to be
objective. Occasional deviations from this rule were stopped immediately by
the President.”‘4 There are, significantly, no complaints to the contrary.
But perhaps most importantly, the papers recognize the significance, for
Germans and for non-Germans alike, of the fact that there have been judicial
proceedings which have examined the evidence and stated the facts on what
happened under Hitler. It is not only, as Dr. Ehard puts it that “A prosecution
‘in court’ of the criminally induced world catastrophe just could not be avoided
unless recourse was to be had to considerably more far-reaching methods,
methods of punishment more questionable for the development of law which
necessarily would have entailed a higher degree of arbitrariness.” It is also,
as Dr. Ehard says earlier, that, “The indictment, the protocols of the proceedings
and the judgment described the fateful course of National Socialism in Germany
and in the world as objectively and impressively as hardly any German description
could have done…. One would like to tell every German to read these
documents, particularly those people who forgot too soon and would like to
avert their eyes from the horrors of the near past.” Or, as another author
puts it “There scarcely exists a more effective means of extinguishing whatever
Nazi ideas and efforts may still exist among the people than the reading of this
Comments such as these, from German sources, are more significant than
disagreements with legal concepts. That the defense agrees that the trial, given
its legal concepts, was fair, and that the judgments are true judgments is high
tribute to both the judges and the prosecution.
I don’t think that Mr Wear will be printing out these opinions any time soon….
Please excuse the formatting!!