14 Nov. 45
SIR HARTLEY SHAWCROSS: Mr. President, I cannot
dispute that, but our law of course contains no provision at all for
trial in absentia. Express provision is made for such trials in the
Charter constituting this Tribunal, provided that the Tribunal
considers it in the interests of justice.
THE PRESIDENT: What exactly is it you are
suggesting to us, that he should be tried in absence or that he
should not be tried in absence?
SIR HARTLEY SHAWCROSS: Mr. President, we have
suggested that advantage should be taken of the provision for trial
in absentia, but as I said at the beginning, it is, as it appears to
me, entirely a matter for the discretion of the Tribunal not one in
which I wish to press any particular view.
THE PRESIDENT: Does the Chief Prosecutor for the
Soviet Union desire to speak? You were authorized, I think, Mr.
Justice Jackson, to speak on behalf of the Chief Prosecutor of the
Soviet Union.
MR. JUSTICE JACKSON: I was authorized to state
that they take the same position as the United States. I don't know
that in answering their questions I would have always given the
answers that they would have given. I understand, for example, that
they do try cases in absentia, and I think their position on that
would be somewhat different from the position I have given.
THE PRESIDENT: This question I asked you, of
course, was directed solely to the Municipal Law of the United
States. Does the Chef Prosecutor of the Soviet Union wish to address
the Tribunal?
COLONEL Y. V. POKROVSKY (Deputy Chief Prosecutor
for the U.S.S.R.: No.
THE PRESIDENT: Then does the Chief Prosecutor for
the French Republic wish to address the Tribunal?
M. CHARLES DUBOST (Deputy Chief Prosecutor for
the French Republic): It would be easy to justify the position taken
today by the French Delegation by merely reminding oneself that on
numerous occasions the French Delegation has advocated the immediate
preparation of a second trial in order that it might; be possible to
proceed with it as soon as the first trial was completed We could in
this way have prosecuted the German industrialists without any
interruption. This point of view has never been adopted. We have
rallied to the point of view of the United States as being the most
expedient and most susceptible of giving complete satisfaction to
French interests. We are anxious that Krupp the son should be tried.
There are serious charges against him, and no one could possibly
understand that there should be no