The Tokyo Trials Episode 2

Beyond Victor's JusticeDraft: Wang Shuo

Voice-over:Shibuya is a special ward in Tokyo, a fashion center for young people. A building there,Higashi Ikebukuro is now the center of Japanese animation. It is hard to imagine the building stands on the site of Sugamo Prison. The Prison housed major Japanese war criminals, while the International Military Tribunal for the Far East was convened in Shibuya. During the Tokyo Trials from May 3rd, 1946 to November 12th, 1948, more than 20 war criminals were shuttled to and from the locations 817 times. Each time, jeeps to the front and rear escorted the military bus.

SOT: Utsumi Aiko[ Professor of Osaka University of Economics and Law]:These are copies of documents publicized by the Information Center of Foreign Affairs. There are not very many. This is the map of Sugamo Prison, it’s printed on both sides, let’s unfold it. This is Sugamo Prison.Journalist: Is it the original one?Utsumi Aiko: Yes.

Voice-over:Utsumi Aiko is a professor at the Osaka University of Economics and Law. In her office is a topographical map of Sugamo Prison. She obtained the map from a class-B war criminal in one of the prison’s cells and recently finished restoring it.

SOTUtsumi Aiko[ Professor of Osaka University of Economics and Law]: I have collected documents compiled by both individuals and the government. It makes me think what was the purpose of the trials? It was not only important about punishing the criminals, but letting the whole of Japan understand what happened. Japanese need to think deeply and learn from the trials.

Voice-over:Sugamo Prison was built in 1895. Before World War II, Japan’s political prisoners were locked up here. The prison was gloomy, cold and horrible, known by few people. After Japan surrendered in 1945, it was taken over by the US Army. It was revamped in accordance with American prison standards; air conditioners and heating equipments were installed.

Voice-over:

1

Meanwhile, the former Imperial Japanese Army Headquarters building was reconstructed for the International Military Tribunal for the Far East. Mei Ju-Ao, the Chinese judge of the Tokyo Trials described it in his diary: “The court is grand indeed. No wonder Chief Prosecutor Mr. Keenan told me when we were in Shanghai, ‘No court in the world is able to compare with it except the Supreme Court of the US.’ ”

Voice-over:In 1946, judges and prosecutors from 11 countries gathered here to attend the “trial of the century”— the Tokyo Trials.

Trial or No TrialVoice-over:Before the Tokyo Trials, the Nuremberg Trials had already begun in Germany. This is courtroom 600, where they took place. Holding the trials in Nuremberg was symbolic because it was where the Nazi Party held its annual rally. It was a warning to the world of what can happen when nothing is done to stand up to racist ideologies.

Voice-over:After the war, Britain suggested executing major war criminals without trials because there was no precedent of international tribunals. During the American Revolutionary War, Major John André, the adjutant general of the British Army in America, was captured by the Continental Army in 1778. He was put on trial by a military committee, which was set up by the Commander-in-Chief, George Washington, and later hanged as a spy.

Voice-over:In the aftermath of World War I, the Allies wanted Kaiser Wilhelm II and other major war criminals to go to trial. However, Germany proposed using its own judicial system.

SOT

Astrid Betz Director[Education and Research Dept. , Memorium Nuremberg Trials]：The Germans at that time were able to convince the victorious powers that the Germans would lead the trials themselves. So in Leipzig, they had the so called Leipzig trials, but the German emperor Wilhelm II was in the Netherlands, so he was in exile, he wasn't in Germany.

Voice-over:The Allies were afraid a civil war would be triggered if Wilhelm II was extradited, which would have forced the allies to intervene once again. Therefore, Germany’s proposal was accepted and a series of trials were held in Leipzig.They became known as the Leipzig Trials.

2

SOTManfred Kittel[Professor of University of Regensburg, Author of After the Nuremberg and Tokyo Trials]Kaiser Wilhelm II was forced to in Germany. Since he started the war he was considered an international war criminal. He needed to be tried, but it failed.

Voice-over:891 Germans were listed as criminals, but only 12 of those were tried and only 6 were found guilty.

Voice-over:The trials were quietly abandoned and regarded as a failure as they did not function as an effective deterrent to German war criminals. In less than 20 years, another world war began. It was far larger and the human losses were immense. The failed Leipzig Trials, however, had a great impact on the trials for World War II’s war criminals.

SOTHe Qinhua[Professor, Former Principal, East China University of Political Science and Law]Before World War II ended, the leaders of the Allied countries signed an agreement that there should be a military tribunal after the war to properly judge the war criminals. Even though the Leipzig Trials were a failure, it had influenced the Nuremberg Trials and the Tokyo Trials.

SOTWolfgang Kaleck[General Secretary of ECCHR]You have to be pragmatic, what were the alternatives after the war? Some people proposed to kill thousands of thousands of Germans in mass executions. And I prefer this kind of more or less fair trial even if it is conducted by the allied winners.

Voice-over:The Nuremberg and Tokyo tribunals served as a basis for international criminal law.The Nuremberg Trials took place from November 1945 to October 1946. Dozens of Nazi war criminals were punished.Robert H. Jackson, Chief Prosecutor for the United States, made his opening statement:“Four great nations, flushed with victory and stung with injury stay the hand of vengeance and voluntarily submit their captive enemies to the judgment of the law is one of the most significant tributes that Power has ever paid to Reason.”

SOTShiba Kensuke[Professor of Tokyo Woman’s Christian University]

3

Basically there were three war crime charges in the Nuremberg Trials -- crimes against peace, common war crimes and crimes against humanity. These three charges were of paramount importance to the Nuremberg principles. The Tokyo Trials were directly affected by the Nuremberg Trials.

Voice-over:By the time the Nuremberg Trials ended, the Tokyo Trials had been underway for several months.

Prosecution and Defense

Voice-over:The IMTFE was convened on May 3rd, 1946. Escorted by American soldiers, defendants entered the courtroom in two lines. The lights were turned on and the room was as bright as day. The courtroom was swarming with journalists.

Voice-over:Arnold Brackman was a journalist with the United Press Associations. He wrote three to four reports on the trials every day. In his book The Other Nuremberg: The Untold Story of the Tokyo War Crimes Trial, he described his impression on the first day.

“At 11:13 a bell tinkled gently, like the bell under the eaves of a Buddhist temple, and a hush fell over the courtroom. The massive wooden doors at the entrance slowly closed, like the gates of an Assyrian walled city, and military police carrying sidearms took up their positions around the room.”

Voice-over:The president of the tribunal, Australian judge William Webb, in his opening statement,

NAT“Before assembling here today, the members of this tributes signed a joint affirmation to administer justice according to law without fear, favor or affection.”

Voice-over:Chief of Counsel for the prosecution, Joseph Berry Keenan said in his opening statement:

NAT“Mr. President, this is no ordinary trial, for here we are waging a part of the determined battle of civilization to preserve the entire world from destruction.”

Voice-over:

4

Chinese Judge Mei Ju-Ao wrote about the first day in his diary: “I only noticed Hideki Tojo and Kenji Doihara, who sat in the middle. Every criminal pretended to be calm, especially Tojo. He stayed still, like he was made of plaster. Iwane Matsui, who should be held the most responsible for the Nanjing Massacre, looked like a poor little sheep.”

Voice-over:Like the Nuremberg Trials, the criminal procedure used by the Tokyo Trials was based on Anglo-American Legal System.

SOTHe Qinhua[Professor, Former Principal, East China University of Political Science and Law]The Anglo-American legal system allows all parties concerned to play their own roles. Judges are the objective third party. Their judgment depends on whether the prosecutors, defendants or the lawyers’ statements are more convincing or not. The side with the strongest and most convincing evidence will win. The procedures of the Anglo-American legal system give the defendants more space to fully express their opinions.

Voice-over:A contest began between the prosecution and the defense.

Voice-over:Japan organized a defense team of 100 attorneys to attend the trials. Months before the tribunal, Japan’s defense attorneys claimed they were unfamiliar with Anglo-American Legal System, and asked for American assistance. President Webb approved the request and 40 American attorneys joined the defense team. The defendants had a team comprised of nearly 150 Japanese and American attorneys.

SOTDavid Cohen[Executive Director, WSD HANADA Center for Human Rights and International Justice, Stanford University Leading War Crimes Authority]Certainly one of the most important reasons why it was a fair trial is that the Japanese defendants had very good lawyers. Both American and Japanese lawyers assigned to defend Japanese accused. They typically did an extremely vigorous and very good job.

Voice-over:Chief prosecutor Joseph Keenan also had help as each Allied nation sent one assistant prosecutor. Keenan was a specialist in violent crimes. He graduated from Harvard University and had served as assistant attorney general of the United States. After the International Military Tribunal for the Far East’s Charter was published in January 1946, the 58-year-old Keenan was appointed director of the International Prosecution

5

Section by General Douglas MacArthur. He was in charge of the collection of evidence, preparing strategy and the debates in court. By 1947, the IPS had a staff of 487.

Voice-over:The first debate between the IPS and the Japanese defense team was regarding the jurisdiction of the tribunal.

NAT

Ichiro Kiyose：The court has no jurisdiction for crimes against peace and crimes

against humanity.

Voice-over:Keenan stood up and refuted Kiyose’s statement. He said:

NAT“Can it be that eleven nations, containing one half to two thirds of the inhabitants of this earth, having suffered through this aggression the loss of a vast amount of their resources and deplorable and incalculable quantities of blood due to the crimes of murder, brigandage and plunder, are now totally impotent to bring to trial and punish those responsible for this worldwide calamity?”

SOTAstrid Betz [Director, Education and Research Dept. , Memorium Nuremberg

Trials]： Actually very important the Geneva conventions and the treaties of the

Hague. They were already before the First World War. And then there was another treaty which became very important is the Briand Kellogg Treaty, in 1928, the American foreign minister and the French foreign minister agreed that if their countries have problems national conflicts with other countries they would solve them peacefully. Japan also signed the treaty, the Briand Kellogg Treaty, and this is an important fact also for the international military tribunal in the Far East.

Voice-over:In addition, the Japanese defense team believed that individuals should not assume responsibility for what the country did. Some suspects tried to defend themselves by presenting a list of orders from their superiors; others said they only made decisions, but had not killed anybody directly.

SOTWolfgang Kaleck[General Secretary of ECCHR]That’s so obvious that this is illegal and that this is violating law. Now this defense is no more valid. Since Nuremberg and since Tokyo, you cannot defend yourself with

6

the reference that you only obeyed orders. The trials from today should not only be directed against the murderer or the torturer who murdered or tortured in person, but also those who gave them the order and those who administrated the bureaucracy, and those who bear the highest responsibilities.

SOTManfred Kittel[Professor of University of Regensburg, author of After the Nuremberg and Tokyo Trials]Some war criminals claimed they only committed crimes because they were following the orders given by their superiors. This defense did not work at either the Nuremberg Trials or the Tokyo Trials.

Voice-over:Arnold Brackman for United Press Associations wrote down a line from a speech made by Keenan on the first day of the Trial in his book: “All governments are operated by human agents, and all crimes are committed by human being. A man’s official position cannot rob him of his identity as an individual nor relieve him from responsibility for his individual offenses.”

Voice-over:The debate also focused on the collection of evidence.

SOTJi Weidong[Dean of Koguan Law School, Shanghai JiaoTong University]The Tokyo Trials were based on the fundamental spirit of the Anglo-American legal system. We could see that during the trials, they emphasized the fairness of procedures and the evidence.

SOTShiba Kensuke[Professor of Tokyo Woman’s Christian University] It was difficult for the prosecutors to collect evidence and they all tried their best. Before Japan signed the surrender, the Japanese had burned up all the official documents, which would have been used as evidence. That’s why it was hard to provide the official documents as evidence.

Voice-over:After Japan surrendered to the Allies, the Japanese government destroyed a large quantity of evidence. They also tried to hide other important evidence. They kept confidential documents in several security boxes and hid the boxes in a basement of a security company’s bombed-out building. They assumed the boxes would not be found because the building had collapsed and the basement was buried under rubble. However, the Allies did find the “secret basement”.

Voice-over:

7

Another difficulty of collecting evidence was that the then Chinese government assumed Japan’s invasion of China was known to the world, and that conducting the trials was merely a way to justify the Allies’ victory. Therefore, the Chinese government had not attached enough importance to protecting evidence during the war or collecting it after the war.

SOTXiang Longwan[Son of Hsiang Che-Chun (Chinese Prosecutor for the Tokyo Trials)] Conditions were horrible and there was no understanding of the need to preserve the evidence. The biggest problem was getting adequate testimony from a victim or physical evidence.

Voice-over:In order to obtain powerful evidence, Keenan, American prosecutors Sutton and Moran, and several other American prosecution staffers came to China in March and April 1946 to investigate Japan’s crimes. Keenan submitted to the Chinese government the Investigating Evidence Outline of the tribunal. It contained 67 items to be investigated, including the Nanjing Massacre.

SOTHe Qinhua[Professor, Former Principal, East China University of Political Science and Law]Keenan had played a very important role in the Tokyo Trials. China lagged behind other nations at that time and in many aspects conditions were hard and he came to China to help and supervise the Chinese prosecutors in their search for evidence.

Voice-over:After each court session ended, the defendants were sent back to Sugamo Prison. As the map preserved by professor Utsumi Aiko shows, room 85 was a theater and room 64A was an infirmary. Defendant Hideki Tojo was placed in the first room on the second floor of building No. 5. In spite of the crimes they had committed, the class-A war criminals lived in large and clean rooms. They had the same Western-style food as American soldiers. On holidays, they could even have Japanese food specially prepared for them.

SOTAstrid Betz [Director, Education and Research Dept., Memorium Nuremberg Trials]I think it is a rule of humanity not to have them starved or whatever, especially because in this court they should speak also, they should answer questions because everybody wanted to know what they think and if they realized that many things they did were really inhuman or if they still believed in it, the court and everyone wanted to hear to listen also maybe not too much but at least to hear what they have to say and what they think.

8

Voice-over:By the end of 1946, the prosecution had wrapped up its case. The class-A war criminals entered the new year in Sugamo Prison. It was now the turn of defense team to make its case. In September 1947, the defense of each individual defendant began. During this stage, class-A war criminals such as Hideki Tojo and Iwane Matsui would appear in court to testify.

Voice-over:The prosecution’s case still remained a daunting task.

Evidence, True or Not

Voice-over:Witnesses for both sides played crucial roles during the tribunal. As one of the most brutal atrocities committed in World War II, the Nanjing Massacre was a particular focus. The prosecution and the defense both provided witnesses in this case.

Voice-over:Witnesses of the Nanjing Massacre included Iwane Matsui, the commander of the Japanese expeditionary force sent to China, and Sekijiro Ogawa, the minister of justice of the Japanese 10th Army.

Voice-over:In his sworn affidavit, Iwane Matsui claimed that he dedicated himself to Sino-Japanese rapprochement during his 12-year stay in China, and that he had demanded discipline in the army. His statement was supported by “evidence” provided by the defense. Sekijiro Ogawa testified: “Commander Iwane Matsui demanded all the soldiers to observe discipline to protect the interest of Chinese citizens and other foreigners.

Voice-over:Cheng Zhaoqi, the director of the Center for the Tokyo Trial Studies at Shanghai Jiao Tong University, investigated first-hand evidence, including the diaries of the defendants and witnesses published since the 1980s and found that their testimonies were inconsistent with the evidence.

SOTCheng Zhaoqi[ Director, Center for the Tokyo Trial Studies, Shanghai JiaoTong University]Sekijiro Ogawa said he met Iwane Matsui on January 4, 1938. and Iwane Matsui said to Ogawa Kanjiro that, “You must strengthen the military discipline”. But when we were reading the journal written by Sekijiro Ogawa, Iwane Matsui didn’t leave the military base in Hangzhou on January 4, so he met him on January 15th. He recorded it in detail, and they didn’t discuss military discipline.

9

Voice-over:Iwane Matsui was in favor of “Asianism”, and he had a strong interest in Chinese civilization. He was a famous “China expert” in Japan, who excelled in the Chinese language, could recite ancient Chinese poems and was proficient at calligraphy. He also understood China’s society, system, geography and history.

NAT: Court: Have you examined the documents which had been handed you the defense document 2738? tell us to know that is your affidavit?

Iwane Matsui: Yes.

NAT:F.J.Mattice,Defense Lawyer of Matsui：I was always firm in the belief that the strife between Japan and China was a quarrel between brothers in the so called “household of Asia”. Therefore when I assumed the command of the Expeditionary Force, I promised myself to settle the trouble between Japan and China on this belief and hoped to make the despatch of the Expeditionary Force not a cause of mutual enmity but something that would help to bring about friendly relations and cooperation between the two nations.”

Voice-over:During the tribunal, he claimed he was a sinophile sent to China to end the war. The order to attack China made him very distressed. However, his diary proved otherwise.

SOTCheng Zhaoqi[Director, Center for the Tokyo Trial Studies, Shanghai JiaoTong University]When Iwane Matsui arrived in Shanghai, the mission he received at that time was to protect Shanghai residents and the main traffic thoroughfares surrounding Shanghai. But after he defeated Shanghai, he moved northwest toward Nanjing. The Japanese military headquarters had given him orders constantly. They gave several orders stating: “you can’t move forward at this time”. He wrote in his diary about the stupidity of the Japanese government. He used the Chinese word for “whip”. He said he would whip them. That’s why Iwane Matsui should bear the highest responsibility for capturing the Chinese capital Nanjing and for the unimaginable cruelty that followed.

NATCourt: According to your conscience and truth not to conceal anything? Okada Takashi:Yes. Court: Please give you name and address pleaseOkada Takashi: Okada Takashi.

Voice-over:

10

Iwane Matsui’s secretary Takashi Okada testified that on December 18th, 1937, the day after the Japanese army entered Nanjing, Matsui said in pain, “My wish for the last 30 years was peace between China and Japan”; and the war between the two countries was a “tragedy” and he was “truly sorry”.

Voice-over:When he returned to Shanghai on December 21st, he wrote in his diary, “It has been only two weeks since I left Shanghai, and I have accomplished the great undertaking of occupying Nanjing. It is a pleasure to be back.” The content of his diary refuted Okada’s testimony.

Voice-over:During the invasion, the Japanese army did not permit news of the massacre to become public knowledge. Therefore, the Nanjing Massacre was not widely known to the world. In order to find more witnesses and evidence, prosecutor Hsiang Che-Chun sent several telegrams to the Chinese government to explain the importance of evidence.

SOTXiang Longwan [Son of Hsiang Che-Chun (Chinese prosecutor for the Tokyo Trials)]By reading the telegraphs, we noticed that they were all hoping the Chinese government would provide the evidence as soon as possible to prove the atrocities of the Japanese army in China.

Voice-over:According to the tribunal’s transcripts, 11 witnesses appeared in court during the portion about the Nanjing Massacre, 8 of them came from China.

Voice-over:Arnold Brackman of the United Press Associations recorded a number of speeches made by Chinese witnesses in his book. He wrote, “The dimensions of the Rape of Nanking were so vast that two witnesses, independently of each other, said from the stand in an awed tone of bewilderment: “I don’t know where to begin.”

Voice-over:He also recorded the testimony of Miner Searle Bates on December 15th. Bates had degrees from the University of Oxford, Yale University and Harvard University, and was a teacher at the University of Nanking “On December 15”, Bates testified, “thirty college girls were raped” on his campus in one building alone. Three days later eighteen girls were raped in six different locations on campus. But a suppressed gasp went up among spectators and others when Bates off-handedly remarked that “his university was located next to the Japanese Embassy.”

NAT

11

Court: Mr. Bates, not having seen the messages, I assume you do not know, of your own knowledge, to whom it was sent in Tokyo. Is that right?Miner Searle Bates: (I should be glad to give you some more evidence) from Japanese sources on that.

Voice-over:When the prosecution asked him,“Who had been in command of the Japanese troops at Nanking?”, Bates replied: “The defendant, General Iwane Matsui”. Arnold Brackman wrote “all eyes in the courtroom involuntarily turned to the dock where the aged and gaunt Matsui looked as if he wanted to flee.”

Voice-over:There were a large number of spectators during the Nanjing Massacre portion of the trials. Many Japanese citizens waited in line outside hoping to get a seat inside the court. There were sections reserved for journalists and the public. Families of members of each delegation were also allowed to attend the trials. At first, many Japanese people came to the court and were skeptical. Japanese people were shocked when the trials unfolded.

SOTGao Wenbin[Secretary and Translator for the Chinese Prosecutor]Because Japanese government used every kind of means to tell the people in Tokyo in Japan that the Japanese soldiers were very good, soldiers were very behavioral and very brave. When the rape of Nanking was brought to trial, they were quite astonished. They never knew that the Japanese, their soldiers had such atrocities in Nanking.

Voice-over:Asahi Shimbun journalists sifted through the materials and published The Transcripts of the Proceedings of the IMTFE. Chief Prosecutor Keenan’s speech was published. It read in part: “The defendants treated human beings as mortgage by conquering, enslaving and killing millions of people, which was like a game to them. Conventions and treaties are merely words and papers in their eyes. ”

Voice-over:In the court’s verdict, there was a section called “Nanjing Massacre” under the 8th Chapter. In this section, the Japanese army’s atrocities were recorded in detail including murder, rape and looting.

Voice-over:Arnold Brackman wrote in his book, “The Rape of Nanjing was not the kind of isolated incident common to all wars. It was deliberate. It was policy.”

Voice-over:

12

However, even to this day China and Japan haven’t reached a consensus on the number of casualties in the Nanking Massacre.

SOTDavid Cohen[Executive Director, WSD HANDA Center for Human Rights and International Justice, Stanford University Leading War Crimes Authority]I think the continuing today, over the numbers of individuals killed in Nanjing is really very misleading. It doesn’t matter whether there were one hundred thousand, two hundred thousand or three hundred thousand. That’s mass atrocities. It’s mass murder. The other reason is because it created impression that was only in Nanjing that these things happen.

Voice-over:Professor Yang found an important diary in the National Archives of the United States when he has been appointed a Historical Consultant to the Nazi War Crimes and Japanese Imperial Government Records Interagency Working Group at the U.S. National Archives. It belonged to Japanese army doctor Akira Hosaka. He recorded details of a group of Japanese soldiers killing Chinese civilians in Changzhou, on their way to Nanjing.

SOTDaqing Yang[Associate Professor at the Sigur Center for Asian Studies, George Washington University]I assume that he always felt this conflict in his moral conscious and after Japan’s defeat he submitted this diary to the American authorities with the hope that American occupation authorities would investigate this particular war crime. Unfortunately this was not the case, I think because this particular massacre took place not in Nanjing but in Changzhou and therefore it was not considered part of the investigation conducted by the Tokyo War Crimes Trial that focused on Nanjing.

Voice-over:Former Japanese Prime Minister Yukio Hatoyama had visited the Nanking Massacre Memorial Hall and planted a peace tree in the Peace Park.

SOTYukio Hatoyama[Forme Prime Minister of Japan]The lives of many especially civilians were taken as a fact. What’s more, the mass media of the time, such as Asahi Shimbun’s report on “Killing a Hundred People Competition” was actually praising it. This happened and should never be denied. Anyone who questions it should go to visit the Nanjing Massacre Memorial Hall.

SOTShiba Kensuke[Professor of Tokyo Woman’s Christian University] Asian people suffered huge losses during the Pacific War. For the sake of these

13

victims, we must punish the war criminals, let those responsible pay the price. Through the Tokyo Trials, we express our hope that war crimes are never committed again. Asian countries should maintain good relations with their neighbors. I think we must be aware of this through the Tokyo Trials.

Voice-over:During his last days in Sugamo Prison, Iwane Matsui felt the Nanjing Massacre was an unforgivable crime. He confided to his prison chaplain, Shinsho Hanayama before he was hanged that “the Nanking Incident was a terrible disgrace”.

The VerdictVoice-over:Oscar Schneider, former Federal Minister of Building in Germany, is 89 this year. He joined the army in 1944. In a battle against the Allies in Berlin he was captured, but was soon released since the Allied troops thought he was only a child.

SOTOscar Schneider[Former German Federal Minister of Building]War was really cruel. All German families faced death in one way or another. There were 12 million people expelled and 14 million homes destroyed. People just live squashed together.

Voice-over:After the war, he majored in law at college. The Nuremberg Trials took place during that period of his life and he followed the news closely.

SOTOscar Schneider[Former German Federal Minister of Building]The Chief prosecutor of the Nuremberg Trials Robert Jackson said: “I am not prosecuting the defendants in the name of the tribunal, but in the name of the people. People around the globe long for peace, people across the world want respect for human nature.

Voice-over:In Tokyo, Japan, 86 year-old Hiroshi Yamakuchi still keeps letters from his father, who was an engineer with Mitsubishi Corp during World War II. His father was later forced to enlist in the “Kamikaze special team attack” and died in the war.

SOTHiroshi Yamakuchi[Son of Kamikaze Special Attach Units]We were in such an enclosed space at that time, the cage of militarism. It’s hard for people to imagine now that this really happened.

Voice-over:

14

Dr. Schneider and Mr. Yamaguchi were young when the Nuremberg Trials and the Tokyo Trials concluded. The final judgment was of great significance to people like them who had experienced the trauma of war.

Voice-over:Although the criminals tried all possible means to defend themselves and stalled the trial process, the tribunal finally came to an end.

Voice-over:On April 16, 1948, President William Webb declared that the court would adjourn until verdict day. From the courtroom to the judge’s deliberation room, the task of writing the history fell on the shoulders of the 11 judges.

SOTHe Qinhua[Professor, Former Principal, East China University of Political Science and Law]The verdict was not just one or two pages. The verdict was hundreds of pages long. They needed to describe the whole case. There was a conference for writing the verdict, basically for reaching an agreement about punishment. They used a simple majority to determine the judgment.

Voice-over:Under the influence of different law systems and having different understandings of international law, the 11 judgers held widely divergent views on the verdict.

Voice-over:Chinese judge Mei Ju-Ao demanded Kenji Doihara, SeishiroItagaki, and Iwane Matsui be severely punished. President Webb asserted that all defendants should be banished to a deserted island, like Napoleon. The American judge Myron Crame agreed with the death penalty, but his attention only focused on criminals who waged the Pacific War and those who abused American prisoners of war. French judge Henri Bernard disagreed with imposing the death penalty because France had abolished it. Filipino judge Delfin Jaranilla, survivor of the Bataan Death March, insisted that all defendants should be sentenced to death.

SOTMei Xiao-Ao[Son of Chinese judge Mei Ju-Ao] This international tribunal was not a general civil or criminal court. Although it was in a legal setting, it was also a diplomatic occasion, an occasion for the game among political powers to occur. Under this circumstance, legal representatives and judges from different countries were protecting their national interests.

Voice-over:Among the 11 judgers, the Indian judge Radhabinod Pal’s opinion was the most

15

startling. He believed the class-A war criminals were not guilty.

SOTNariaki Nakazato[Honorary Professor, University of Tokyo]Simply speaking, he thought it was an illegal trial. There were political reasons for his belief. Pal believed that the wars Japan had launched, such as Mukden Incident, the Pacific War, were designed to liberate Asia.

Voice-over:During World War II, Japan had supported India’s independence movements, railing against British colonial rule with the slogan “Asia is for Asians”. Judge Pal wrote a conclusion of hundreds of thousands of words claiming that the class-A war criminals were not guilty.

SOTDavid Cohen[Executive Director, WSD HANDA Center for Human Rights and International Justice, Stanford University Leading War Crimes Authority]Justice Pal failed in the most fundamental duty of a Judge. He was not impartial, he was not independent and he did not make his decision on the basis at the evidence of the trial. That’s in the record because as I said he announced to his fellow judges before the trial began what his decision would be. In doing that he violated the most basic principle of judicial affix. And to my mind if he had been responsible as a judge, and had integrity as a human being, he would not have accepted the position of judge on the trial. Because he knew what the decision was before the trials started and was therefore not impartial.

Voice-over:Japanese people were deeply grateful to this Indian judge. In 1975, a “Pal Memorial Hall” was built in Hakone, a small town near Tokyo. A Japanese version of Pal’s dissentient judgment is there. There is also a stone statue of him in Yasukuni Shrine.

SOTNariaki Nakazato[ Honorary Professor, University of Tokyo]Both the Tokyo Trials and the Nuremberg Trials were significant events. But Pal did not admit the significance of either. This was related to how we should think about what happened in the 20th century, which is a big problem. Pal’s view was that aggressive war was responsible, because it’s about national sovereignty. He believed that if it was needed, a nation could start a war. It’s impossible to do whatever you want in terms of national sovereignty in modern society.

Voice-over:In cases where the judges opposed each other, the majority opinion from 7 judges of the United States, Britain, Russia, China, Canada, New Zealand and the Philippines, was adopted at the end. Pal published his dissentient judgment after he went back to

16

India.

SOTChen Xinyu[Director of Institute for Law and Modernity, Tsinghua University]At the time, every aspect was taken into consideration, including the procedures and the independence of the judges. From this perspective, it should be an impartial judge who depended on the rule of law.

Voice-over:On November 4th, 1948, the judges entered the court and announced the verdict conclusion respectively.

NATWebb: I now read the judgment of the IMTFE. We do not intend that the Japanese people shall be enslaved as a race or destroyed as a nation but stern justice shall be meted out to all war criminals including those who have visited cruelties upon our prisoners, including those who have visited cruelties upon our prisoners.

Voice-over:This was the final and the most serious stage of the two-and-a-half-year tribunal. The reading of the verdict took seven days. All 25 defendants were pronounced guilty, and seven major war criminals were sentenced to death by hanging.Mei Ju-Ao once said in private: “We will be discredited to meet our fellow countrymen if we fail to make a convincing judgment.” Those were the hardest days for Mei Ju-Ao, but he tried his best.

SOTMei Xiao-Ao[Son of Chinese judge Mei Ju-Ao] The opportunity for me to sit high on the judgment seat, to punish these criminals, was exchanged by the flesh and blood of millions of Chinese fellows. I should be vigilant. I should be serious.

Voice-over:Prosecutor Hsiang Che-Chun brought the written verdict of the Tokyo Trials to China. The verdict demonstrated the will of the majority, which decided that the war criminals should be punished by law.

SOTWolfgang Kaleck[General Secretary of ECCHR]:The legal community and the elites were heavily involved in the war crimes they objected the trials. They called it Winner Justice. For the time 1946, just after the Second World War, the standards were lower than they are now so it’s not fair to judge from now. They laid the basis for international criminal law for the international criminal court of today for universal jurisdiction.

17

ConclusionVoice-over:Today in Germany, the names of murdered Jews are engraved on bronze plates embedded in the walls of people’s homes to remind them of the evil humans can inflict on one another. A Holocaust Memorial seeks to preserve the dark chapter of history with numerous exhibitions.

Voice-over:However, in today’s Japan, the Tokyo Trials have been largely forgotten. Shoppers in the 60-floor Sunshine City at Higashi Ikebukuro don’t know it was once the location of Sugamo Prison. “Sugamo” is now only known as the name of a metro station.

Voice-over:After the Tokyo Trials, Arnold Brackman returned to America. He thought it was necessary to tell people what happened, so he wrote “The Other Nuremberg: The Untold Story of the Tokyo War Crimes Trial” in 1987.On the back flap, Brackman wrote:“Today, those convicted and executed for war crimes in Tokyo have been enshrined. Current Japanese history books treat the war as if it barely existed. The Other Nuremberg shows why the trials should not be forgotten——as a warning to future generations that aggression will be brought to justice.”

Voice-over:More than 70 years have passed since those dark days in Europe as well as in Asia during World War II. While people may have forgiven what happened in the past, history must not be forgotten.

Voice-over:The Tokyo Trials should not be swept under the rug. Our children should know what happen.

（The end）

18