As the world’s first major war crimes trial, the Nuremburg Tribunal confirmed the principles and tenets that now form the bases of customary international war law. Germany’s leaders were convicted in 1946 of crimes against peace and humanity for waging wars of aggression against eleven nation states in violation of the Kellogg-Briand Pact. The judgement highlighted the principles governing conflict between nations, and the responsibilities of individuals in preventing war.
“After the signing of the Pact, any nation resorting to war as an instrument of national policy breaks the Pact. In the opinion of the Tribunal, the solemn renunciation of war as an instrument of national policy necessarily involves the proposition that such war is illegal in international law; and that those who plan and wage such a war with its inevitable and terrible consequences are committing a crime in so doing...
It was submitted [by the defendants] that international law is concerned with the action of sovereign states, and provides no punishment for individuals; and further, that where the act in question is an act of state, those who carry it out are not personally responsible, but are protected by the doctrine of the sovereignty of the State. In the opinion of the Tribunal, both these submissions must be rejected. That international law imposes duties and liabilities upon individuals as well as upon States has long been recognised…
The very essence of the [London] Charter is that individuals have international duties which transcend the national obligations of obedience imposed by the individual State. He who violates the laws of war cannot obtain immunity while acting in pursuance of the authority of the State, if the State in authorising action moves outside its competence under international law…
That a soldier was ordered to kill or torture in violation of the international law of war has never been recognised as a defence to such acts of brutality, though, as the Charter here provides, the order may be urged in mitigation of the punishment. The true test, which is found in varying degrees in the criminal law of most nations, is not the existence of the order, but whether moral choice was in fact possible…"
Download The Nuremburg Judgement (pdf)
Comment
The Nuremburg War Crimes Tribunal was the first occasion in modern history when political leaders were held to account for their crimes in a court of law. The essence of the trials was that individual leaders and officials could not shelter behind their duty to the state, when the state was in breach of international law. As Germany had ratified the Kellogg-Briand Pact, its leaders, by breaching the Pact, had committed serious crimes for which they were personally responsible and for which they were convicted and punished.
The Nuremburg trials are important in that they provide the first example of the rule of international war law in action and the judgment gave a lucid account of the laws against war and the principles which underpin relations between states. The International Law Commission used the Nuremburg judgment as the basis for the statutory laws against war agreed in 1950 by the UN General Assembly which were entitled the Nuremburg Principles in recognition of their source.
The single most important development derived from the Nuremburg judgment is the focus on the responsibility of the individual in matters of international warfare. Individuals who start, support, condone or take part in a war are criminally liable for the resulting deaths and injuries and are to be held to account for their crimes in court. Historically national leaders such as Kaiser Wilhelm or Napoleon Bonaparte who were responsible for waging wars causing the deaths of millions had escaped the ultimate penalty for their crimes. The Nuremburg judgement made it clear that not only could Heads of State be indicted, tried and convicted as war criminals, but so too could all those individuals who were responsible for planning, supporting, condoning, funding or taking part in a war of aggression.
The main legal principle derived from Nuremburg is that every citizen has a duty to humankind to exercise a moral choice and to take action to prevent their leaders and governments from violating the laws of war and waging a war of aggression.
