 |
[allega...] tions has been carefully examined. We deem it
insufficient to establish that the defendant Buetefisch was directly connected
with these spoliative activities, or that he was personally involved therein,
within the meaning of Control Council Law No. 10.
Special stress is
placed by the prosecution on Buetefisch's connection with the Continental Oil
Company which, according to findings of the IMT, was engaged in spoliation
activities in occupied territories in the East. Buetefisch was a member of the
Aufsichtsrat of Continental Oil Company, but it does not appear from the
evidence that he was particularly active in the management of the concern. Nor
does it appear that he ordered, authorized, or directed the activities of
Continental Oil Company which amounted to spoliation. The evidence does not
establish beyond reasonable doubt that Buetefisch is guilty under count two by
virtue of his activities in the Continental Oil Company, and he is,
accordingly, acquitted of all the charges under this count.
Haefliger. It has been proved that Haefliger, a member of the
Vorstand, knew of Farben’s proposal that Farben be appointed as trustee
for the Polish plants and that, at the suggestion of von Schnitzler, he
approached the Ministry of Economics in a preliminary conference on the subject
of the Polish plants. The conference was limited, however, to a discussion of
the appointment of experts necessary for commercial and technical operations,
and the preliminary reaction of the Ministry was unfavorable. Haefliger is not
connected by the evidence with any subsequent action of Farben’s for
acquisition of the Polish plants. Haefliger has testified that he did not know
at the time that the plan was to acquire these plants permanently for Farben.
We cannot say that it has been proved beyond reasonable doubt that Haefliger
was a party to the spoliation and plunder by Farben of the Polish factories.
His subsequent action as a member of the Vorstand must be considered on the
same basis as the evidence with reference to the other defendants, and would
not warrant a finding of guilt.
Haefliger was, however, criminally
connected with the plans for the spoliation of Norway. Haefliger reported to
the Vorstand on the participation of Farben in the proposed exploitation of the
Norwegian resources in the interest of the German war economy. He attended
meetings at the Reich Air Ministry at which details of the project and
participation therein were planned and discussed. He was fully aware of the
nature of the project as an armament expansion program. He knew that the plan
contemplated, as a subsidiary detail, the acquisition of the majority shares of
the French shareholders. We are convinced beyond reasonable doubt that his
activity in relation to this whole matter was on such a comprehensive basis
that he knew that Norsk-Hydro was being forced to enter the project involving
|
1162 |
. 
