The International Military Tribunal for the Far East "Before assembling here today the Members of the Tribunal signed a joint affirmation to administer justice according to law, without fear, favor or affection. We fully appreciate the great responsibility resting upon us. There has been no more important criminal trial in all history. Certainly we are not a Senate or a House of Peers met for the impeachment of a Verrus or a Hastings, but a court of our respective countries. On the other hand the accused before us were no mere provincial governors, but for more than a decade were the leaders of Japan at the height of her power and prosperity. They include former prime ministers, foreign ministers, finance ministers, chiefs of staff, and others who have filled the highest places in the government of Japan. The crimes alleged are crimes against the peace of the world, against the laws of war. And against humanity, and conspiracy to commit these crimes. They are so many and so great that is was decided the appropriate forum would be a military tribunal of an international character, namely a tribunal comprised of the representatives of the Allied powers that defeated Japan. While the former high rank of the accused of itself entitles them to no greater consideration than would be extended to the humblest Japanese private or Korean guard, the number and quality of the crimes charged ensure for them the most anxious consideration by the Tribunal of the evidence that will be adduced, and also the most careful ascertainment by the Tribunal of the law applicable. To our great task we bring open minds both on the facts and on the law. The onus will be on the prosecution to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt." All Japan... ... middle of paper ... ...e to make a written application in advance before seeking to produce any evidence in the form of documents or witnesses. This prior disclosure however was not necessary for the Prosecution. There was also detrimental information that was obtained from the Accused without any legal protection prior to the trials. In essence the Defense team was seriously understrengthed and unprepared to face such a complete, powerful, and large prosecution team. The 28 defendants charged were selected after international deliberations and the International Prosecution Section made the final decision. Of these 28, two committed suicide and one was declared insane, and out of the 25 remaining were convicted and all but 2 were found guilty on at least two charges. The Tribunal had completed its duties in applying international law, whether just or not, upon Japan’s War Criminals.
"I shall show you what happens to people who defy the laws of the land! In the tribunal everybody is equal, here there is no regard for rank or position. The great torture shall be applied to you!" (194)
Another powerful opinion yearning to be exposed, is the one held by Henry Drummond, the defense’s attorney. The lawyer undoubtedly came to d...
Some 1,500 “enemy aliens” who were thought to have connections with Japan were immediately rounded up and interned by the De...
To understand the fact that the mood of the novel was a very racially charged, the reader can reflect back to this time period in history and understand why it was so hard for Kabuo Miyamoto to receive a fair trial. One piece of historical evidence that show the racial animosity that majority of the population felt toward Japanese Americans the aftermath of the bombing of Pearl Harbor. In the early morning hours of December 7, 1941 the United States was deliberately attacked by the Empire of Japan (Shandley 5). Within a few hours the Japanese has destroyed a majority of the Pacific Fleet of the United States naval capacity (5). Yet to the average American they took much more. The attack drove the American way of life into that of xenophobic thought. Never before had the United States been invaded in such a was as the events of December 7. Americans, in shock, feared anyone that they believed as being “enemy alien”(Desai 2). The American government in an effort combat this fear and to resolve the chance of “Japanese Aggression toward the United States as a whole” enacted the Executive order 9066 (Desai ...
“The four chief prosecutors of the International Military Tribunal (IMT)—Robert H. Jackson (United States), Francois de Menthon (France), Roman A. Rudenko (Soviet Union), and Sir Hartley Shawcross (Great Britain)—hand down indictments against 24 leading Nazi officials,” (“The Nuremberg Trials”). Alongside the judges stood A prosecutorial staff of over 600 Americans plus additional hundreds from the other three powers assembled and began interviewing potential witnesses and identifying documents from among the 100,000 captured for the prosecution case,” (Doug Linder). This was a time in history that really brought together the great nations and made them what they are
During the Second World War, Japan committed many heinous war crimes. Pearl Harbor, the Rape of Nanking, and the torturing of POW’s, are all high on the list of notable war crimes, but there is one that is often overlooked. For a ten year span (1935-1945), Japan was very keen on the idea of developing more diverse and destructive chemical and biological weapons. This may sound like every other Allied and Axis country, but Japan’s experiments would make even Josef Mengele cringe. The reason why I am saying this is because, Japan’s “Epidemic Prevention and Water Purification Department” (a.k.a Unit 731), was an excuse for human experimentation and torture. Even more sickening than this, is the fact that United States granted amnesty to all those involved in these unexcusable acts against humanity, in return for information on their research.
In the late 1980s through the 1990s, the republics of the former Yugoslavia experienced serious ethnic tensions, escalating into all-out war which resulted in some of the worst war crimes committed in Europe since World War II. In 1993, the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia was formed with the goal of punishing perpetrators who carried out acts of genocide and crimes against humanity in the wars in Croatia and Bosnia-Herzegovina and to prevent any such atrocities from ever occurring again. One of the most significant and high-profile trials of this tribunal was that of Slobodan Milosevic, the former president of both Serbia and the former Yugoslavia, who was accused of committing crimes against humanity, war crimes, and abuses of power and corruption. Milosevic died in 2006, and his trial was never concluded. Whether or not he would have been convicted of these crimes is a subject of debate.
...f American citizens of Japanese ancestry and resident aliens from Japan.The Japanese attempted to fight back and prove their innocence.The most famous case, Korematsu v. United States shows that. According to Kelly “The Korematsu case was significant because it ruled that the United States government had the right to exclude and force people from designated areas based on their race.” The decision was 6-3 that the need to protect the United States from spying and other wartime acts was more important than Korematsu's individual rights,better yet any Japanese-American’s rights. To cover up the fact that it was mass hysteria the paranoid Americans claimed it was justified by the Army’s claims that Japanese Americans were radio-signaling enemy ships from shore and were most likely disloyal. The court called the incarceration a “military necessity”(Korematsu Institute).
The Incarceration of Japanese Americans is widely regarded as one of the biggest breaches of civil rights in American History. Incarceration evolved from deep-seated anti-Japanese sentiment in the West Coast of the United States. After the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor on December 7th, 1941, pressure from the military leadership, politicians, media and nativist groups in the West Coast eventually convinced the President Franklin Roosevelt that action had to be taken to deal with the national security “threat” that Japanese Americans posed. In reality, Japanese Americans were no real threat to the United States, but the racist sentiments against them prevailed and greatly influenced United States policy during the war.
Many countries started to draw up lists of wanted Nazi war criminals following World War II. In August 1945, the International Military Tribunal (IMT) was established to deal and try the war criminals.1 One of the only alternatives considered besides the Tribunal and its trial was swift execution. A war crime trial is trial of persons charged with criminal violation of the laws and customs of war and related principles of international law.
Working, Russell. "The Trial of Unit 731." The Japan Times Online. N.p., 1 June 2001. Web. 6 Dec. 2011. .
The report of the Lytton Commission was undoubtedly a unique achievement. Although a neutral commission investigated the underlying factors of the affair with much care, the tediousness of the task required a large span of time, and it seemed that Japan did not take the prolonged actions of the League of Nations into serious consideration. In fact, despite the investigation of the Lytton Commission, the situation in Manchuria continued to worsen. The lesson of the League’s failure to deal effectively with the Manchurian incident was epitomized by Japan’s withdrawal from the League of Nations. At this point, the sincerity of Japan’s approval of the final report was revealed, and they prepared for new and greater conquests in China, ultimately worsening Sino-Japanese relations.
What is a military tribunal? Has the U.S. used military tribunals in the past? Is the U.S. currently using military tribunals and, if so, what is their status?
Even after all the proof of their innocents and the 99 witness that protested their innocents the jury still put them to death. Also during this time Attorney General Mitchell Palmer lead raids known as the Palmer Raids agai...
A war crime is an unjust act of violence in which a military personnel violates the laws and acceptable behaviors of a war. Despite all the violence in a war, a soldier shooting another is not considered a war crime because it is not a violation to the laws and practices of a war, and it is considered just. A war crime is defined as a “violations [violation] of the laws and customs of war” (“War Crimes”), and are attacks “against civilian populations, prisoners of war, or in some cases enemy soldiers in the field” (Friedman). War crimes are typically committed with weapons or by uncommon, cruel, devastating military methods and are “…Committed primarily by military personnel” (Friedman). There are many different types of war crimes one can commit, including “murder, ill treatment…murder or ill treatment of prisoners of war or persons on the seas, killing of hostages, plunder of public or private property, wanton destruction of cities, towns, or villages or devastation not justified by military necessity” (Friedman). Originally constructed as international law by the London Charter on August 8th, 1945 and further developed by the Hague Conventions of 1899, 1907 and the Nuremberg trials, war crimes are aggressive, unacceptable and unjust actions performed by military workforce that occur during a war.