International Law

The Nuremberg War Crimes TrialThe Nuremberg warfare crimes audition , portrayed by some(prenominal) a(prenominal) as a landmark in international native law , actually appeared to be stacked against the def closingants and was evidently conducted to make believe a desired result . Even before the end of the endorsement World War , representatives of the allied forces and some of the European governments in exile were already discussing the fate of the leadership of Nazi Germany after the war . The general belief prevailing at the conviction was that the Nazi leadership should be put forwarded to a semipolitical quite than a legal judgment because the crimes they committed were beyond the celestial orbit of human justice In event , the leaders from England , France and the Soviet Union favored summarily execution the Naz i leaders . They were prevailed upon by the United States , however , which had been advocating for a mental testing . By August 1945 , delegates from the four countries gathered in London to leaven the International Military Tribunal which would distort the cases in Nuremberg (Court TVThe tourist romance , with two judges by the piece coming from the four countries indicted blackjack oak so-called German war criminals under(a) four counts namely : conspiracy , crimes against peace war crimes and crimes against humanity The defense mold up by almost of the accused claiming that they were only under the s of Adolf Hitler when they committed the allege crimes was brushed aside by the court which later sentenced cardinal of them to death while iii were imprisoned for life A prison term of twenty dollar bill days was meted out for two of the accused and one each was sentenced to an immurement of fifteen and ten years Three of them were released when the court s et in motion them not guilty of any crime , ! including Franz von Papen , the German premier who helped propel Hitler and his Nazi party to power in 1933 (The biography Place n .dThe trial had plenty of limitations and shortcomings .

This has material trunk doubts as to its fairness and impartiality and in fact bosom some people to question its outcome . As a matter of fact , Robert H . Jackson himself , the chief public prosecutor for the United States , alluded to the possibility of a one-sided result when he stated in his opening statement that Unfortunately , the elan of these crimes is such that both prosecution and judgment must be by victor natio ns over the vanquished foes The neutrality of the judges , therefore , was neer a guarantee even before the trial started (Robert H . Jackson , 1945This was aggravated by the systemic defects in the laws expressly established to guide the conduct of the judiciary . atomic number 53 of these was the acceptance of hearsay or second-hand breeding , or untarnished rumors , as evidence . There was never a famine of this owing to the great number of relatives of alleged war crimes victims who were shouting for justice Another was the fact that the conclusion of the tribunal was final examination and could not be subject to appeal because there was no court higher than the tribunal where an appeal...If you want to get a full essay, order it on our website: OrderCustomPaper.com

If you want to get a full essay, visit our page: write my paper