understanding by the United States of the problem you have had to deal with, and are going to have to deal with on this Continent, than you think. PROFESSOR TRAININ. It is because of that consideration that we have accepted the American view that the verdict must apply to the whole of the organization. SIR DAVID MAXWELL FYFE. It seems to me there are two methods of approach which we ought to explore. This is a point of great difficulty on which there is a great difference, but I am still hopeful that it may be solved. On the one side, I should ask that we consider what is the irreducible minimum of notice that would satisfy the American and British conception that a person can only be subject to a judgment if he is given the chance of questioning; that is, let us try to consider what is the smallest amount of notice. On the other side, there is the suggestion put forward, or at least implied in what Professor Trainin has said; that is, you could have judgment under article 10 which would pronounce for the benefit of humanity and posterity the enormities of the Gestapo and S.S. but would not be binding on the occupation courts who have dealt with the subsequent members. MR. JUSTICE JACKSON. Our alternative seems as bad as the plan. I am not saying this is an easy plan. It certainly is not. The alternative is thousands of trials. There are hundreds of thousands of members of these two organizations. The thought that each one might delay the proceedings by raising the issue of the nature of the organization is appalling to me and makes it a task that I think never can be accomplished. We shall run some risks of dealing with persons who will want to defend if they have notice. If we recess until Monday, I will try to prepare the kind of notice that I think would suffice. If we are to do any translating, we would probably have to have until Tuesday. We shall try to have it late Monday. SIR DAVID MAXWELL FYFE. If Monday afternoon would give you time, shall we adjourn until three o'clock Monday afternoon? The Conference adjourned until Monday, July 16, 1945, at 3 p.m. XXVIII. Illustrative Notice of Trial to Members of Accused Organizations, Submitted by American Delegation, July 16, 1945 A SUGGESTED EXAMPLE OF NOTICE TO MEMBERS OF GESTAPO AND S.S. AS TO TRIAL OF THEIR ASSOCIATION OR ORGANIZATION BEFORE INTERNATIONAL MILITARY TRIBUNAL FOR The Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, the United Kingdom, the Provisional Government of France, and the United States of America -28 Goering, Ribbentrop, and others, and the Gestapo and the S.S. as organizations, groups, or associations. Notice is hereby given: That the above named organizations, to wit-the Gestapo and the S.S.-stand before the above tribunal charged with being criminal organizations, membership in which will subject the members to punishment upon conviction of the organization; That any person who acknowledges membership in either of said organizations, and submits himself to the jurisdiction of said tribunal, and surrenders himself to the custody of the forces of the four nations at --- on or before the --day of. 1945 will be entitled to representation at said tribunal, and through representatives of the group, organization, or association will be entitled to submit evidence or argument to controvert said charge; And that in default of appearance as above provided, any member of said organization shall be precluded from questioning in any court or commission such findings as the above named tribunal shall make. 243 XXIX. Amendments Proposed by American Delegation, July 16, 1945 MEMORANDUM to Conference of Representatives of the UNION OF SOVIET SOCIALIST REPUBLICS, the UNITED KINGDOM, the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA and the Provisional Government of FRANCE, Submitted by the UNITED STATES TO Accompany Suggested AMENDMENTS to the Draft of the CHARTER Prepared by the DRAFTING COMMITTEE 1. It is suggested that there be added at the end of Article 10 a proviso reading as follows: "provided notice deemed reasonable by the Tribunal is given all members of the organization and any such members desiring to be heard as witnesses regarding the criminal character of such organization are afforded an opportunity to be heard in such manner as the Tribunal deems fair and just." 2. It is suggested that there be added as a parenthesis after subparagraph (b) of Article 6 the following: "(An invasion of another country in the absence of an attack upon, invasion of, or declaration of war against such country shall for purposes of this Agreement constitute the launching of a war of aggression)." 3. It is suggested that there be added as subparagraph 3 of Article 15 the following: "Any Chief Prosecutor may (1) bring to trial before such International Military Tribunal any person in the custody of his Government or of any Government which consents to the trial of such person, and any group or organization, representative members of which are in the custody of his Government, if, in his judgment such person, group, or organization has committed any criminal violation of International Law defined in Article 12 hereof; and (2) introduce any evidence which in his judgment has probative value relevant to the issues raised by the charges being tried." 244 4. It is suggested that Article 22 be amended to read as follows: "The Tribunal shall receive in evidence sworn or unsworn statements of witnesses, depositions, recorded examinations before or findings of military or other tribunals; the acts or documents of the Committees set up in the various Allied countries for the investigation of war crimes; copies of any official reports, publications and documents or other evidentiary materials and all such other evidence as is customarily received by international tribunals." 5. It is suggested that the matter in brackets in subparagraph (b) of Paragraph 18 be stricken. This matter reads as follows: "And to prevent the use of the trial as a means of a dissemination of propaganda." 16 July 1945. ROBERT H. JACKSON Chief of Counsel for the United States of America XXX. Minutes of Conference Session of SIR DAVID MAXWELL FYFE [presiding]. When we adjourned on Friday, we were dealing with paragraph 10 of the subcommittee's draft of the charter [XXV], and we were in a certain difficulty with the conception of "notice". It was suggested to me afterwards that it might be a helpful approach if we would provide that the Tribunal give notice, and I have a draft of an addition to article 10 for us to consider. I wonder whether this would carry out our wishes. I feel that there is no real difference among us, and I hope that something like this may help. Would it be convenient for me to go through it bit by bit so as to translate it and explain what each bit is? "After receipt of the Indictment, the Tribunal shall give notice as it thinks fit that the prosecution intends to ask the Tribunal to make such declaration That relates back to paragraph 10 as it stands unaltered. The Tribunal may declare in connection with any act of which the individual may be convicted that the group or organization of which the defendant is a member is a criminal organization and that any member of the organization may defend it who submits himself to the jurisdiction of the Tribunal. That is, in order to be heard at all, he must admit that the Tribunal is entitled to inquire into these charges; otherwise he would not be heard. And "through the defendants charged in their capacity of members of the organization”—that relates back to the discussion that we had on the agreement when, you remember, we put in these words that "whether they may be accused individually in the capacity of members of the organization," "be entitled to submit evidence or argument to controvert the allegation that the organization was a criminal organization." Those who come forward will be attached to them and through Kaltenbrunner's case they can either give evidence or produce arguments. The final words "that the organization is a criminal organization" then limit the extent to which he can be heard. He can be heard only on the question of whether the organization is a criminal organization. Number 10 would read: "After receipt of the Indictment, the Tribunal shall give such notice as it thinks fit that the prosecution intends to ask the Tribunal to make |