CYIL 2015

ALLA TYMOFEYEVA CYIL 6 ȍ2015Ȏ officially launched on 1 September 1939, this type of jurisdiction of the IMT was limited to the period from 24 February 1920 to 8 May 1945 . The starting date is the day when Adolf Hitler announced the German Labour Party’s program. 19 As to the ending date, in most of the former Soviet Union republics 9 May 1945 is considered to be the last day of World War II. There are disputes as to authenticity of this date among the European states as far as the western countries celebrate the end of this war on the preceding day. The author chose the date in question on the basis of the Judgment stating that “ All the defendants, with divers other persons, during a period of years preceding 8 May 1945 , participated …“ 20 Many authors criticise the retroactivity of the IMT and selective prosecution. 21 Usually, ratione temporis of international courts commences for the respondent state from the date of ratification of the corresponding treaty by this state party. 22 Ratione personae jurisdiction is specified already in the title of the London agreement. The IMT in the Trial dealt only with the cases of the major war criminals of the European Axis . Neither the London agreement nor the Charter gives a definition or any clarification on this term. In the course of World War Two, the three main partners in the Axis alliance were Germany, Italy, and Japan. Regarding the Axis in Europe, in different periods of the war, Nazi Germany also offered economic aid and military protection to Slovakia, Romania, Hungary, Yugoslavia, Bulgaria. Nonetheless, in view of the historical reality, the Trial concerned only Germans. The concrete defendants here were Goering, Hess, Ribbentrop, Keitel, Kaltenbrunner, Rosenberg, Frank, Frick, Streicher, Funk, Schacht, Doenitz, Raeder, von Schirach, Sauckel, Jodl, von Papen, Seyss-Inquart, Speer, von Neurath, Fritzsche and Bormann. 23 All of them, inter alia , were accused of committing crimes against peace. Moreover, the London agreement clarifies that the persons may be accused “ individually or in their capacity as members of the organizations or groups or in both capacities ”. 24 The indictment in issue includes the names of the groups or organizations to which the defendants belonged. 25 19 The Judgment of the IMT. URL: < http://avalon.law.yale.edu/imt/judnazi.asp#origin> [cit. 2015-08-10]. 20 Nuremberg Trial Proceedings Vol. 1. Indictment: Count One. URL: [cit. 2015-08-10]. 21 SELLARS, Kirsten. Imperfect Justice at Nuremberg and Tokyo. EJIL (2010), Vol. 21 No. 4, p. 1089; WANHONG, Zhang. From Nuremberg to Tokyo: Some Reflections on the Tokyo Trial (On the Sixtieth Anniversary of the Nuremberg Trials). Cardozo Law review, Vol. 27:4, p. 1675; CLARK, Roger S. Nuremberg and the Crime Against Peace, 6 Wash. U. Global Stud. L. Rev. 527 (2007), p. 539-540. 22 See, for example, the European Convention on Human Rights, 4 November 1950. 23 The Judgment of the IMT, cited above. 24 Article 1 of the London Agreement, cited above. 25 DIE REICHS REGIERUNG (REICH CABINET); DAS KORPS DER POLITISCHEN LEITER DER NATIONALSOZIALISTISCHEN DEUTSCHEN ARBEITERPARTEI (LEADERSHIP CORPS OF THE NAZI PARTY); DIE SCHUTZSTAFFELN DER NATIONALSOZIALISTISCHEN DEUTSCHEN ARBEITERPARTEI (commonly known as the “SS”) and including DER SICHERHEITSDIENST (commonly known as the “SD”); DIE GEHEIME STAATSPOLIZEI (SECRET STATE POLICE, commonly known as the “GESTAPO”); DIE STURM ABTEILUNGEN

28