resistance activities by any other state which found itself
in a position similar to that of Germany at that time. Latest developments show
that the occupation powers in Germany now do not hesitate to impose the most
severe penalties in similar cases.
For example, the American Military
Government for Germany in its Ordinance No. 1, which was issued to insure the
safety of the Allied Armed Forces and to reestablish public order in the
territory occupied by them, lists, among others, the following acts as crimes
punishable by death:
Communication of information which
may be dangerous to the security or property of the Allied Forces, or
unauthorized possession of such information without promptly reporting it; and
unauthorized communication by code or cipher;
Interference with transportation or
communication or the operation of any public service or utility;
Any other violation of the laws of
war or act in aid of the enemy or endangering the security of the Allied
Forces.
A comparison of these regulations
with the contents of the court martial regulations of the Governor General for
the Occupied Polish Territories, presented in Document Book II for the
defendant Gebhardt, shows clearly that here generally the same facts were
declared to be punishable with the death sentence.
In order to exclude any doubts with
regard to the legal status of the experimental subjects, it may be pointed out
in conclusion that, the members of the Polish Resistance Movements, at least
when the prisoners belonged to these movements, did not fulfill the conditions
of Article I of the Hague Convention for Land Warfare of 1907 [Section I,
Chapter I, Annex to the Convention] concerning militia and voluntary corps not
affiliated with the army and having a certain military organization. The Polish
Resistance Movement at that time (1) had no leader who was ostensibly at its
head and responsible for the conduct of the members; (2) it wore no particular
badge recognizable from a distance; (3) it did not bear its arms openly; and
finally, (4) in its conduct of war it disregarded the laws and practices of
war. In view of these facts the members of the Resistance Movement could not
lave been treated as prisoners of war even if at that time a Polish Army had
still been in the field. In view of the, fact that the prisoners in question
were women serving in the communications and espionage branches of the
Resistance Movement, this possibility was eliminated from the very
beginning.
* * * * * * * * *
*
979
|