 |
utilized involuntary foreign workers in many of its plants. It is
enough to say here that the utilization of forced labor, unless done under such
circumstances as to relieve the employer of responsibility, constitutes a
violation of that part of Article II of Control Council Law No. 10 which
recognizes as war crimes and crimes against humanity the enslavement,
deportation, or imprisonment of the civilian population of other countries.
What we have said about the employment of involuntary foreign laborers is
equally applicable to prisoners of war and inmates of concentration
camps.
The Defense of Necessity
The defendants here
on trial have invoked what has been termed the defense of necessity. They say
that the utilization of slave labor in Farben plants was the necessary result
of compulsory production quotas imposed upon them by the government agencies,
on the one hand, and the equally obligatory measures requiring them to use
slave labor to achieve such production, on the other. Numerous decrees, orders,
and directives of the Labor Office have been brought to our attention, from
which it appears that said agency assumed dictatorial control over the
commitment, allotment, and supervision of all available labor within the Reich.
Strict regulations prescribed almost every aspect of the relationship between
employers and employees. Industries were prohibited from employing or
discharging laborers without the approval of the agency. Heavy penalties,
including commitment to concentration camps and even death, were set forth for
violation of these regulations. The defendants who were involved in the
utilization of slave labor have testified that they were under such oppressive
coercion and compulsion that they cannot be said to have acted with that intent
which is a necessary ingredient of every criminal offense.
The
existence of the stringent regulations of the Reich labor authorities must be
conceded and this requires us to inquire what opportunity, if any, the
defendants had of evading them and what the consequences would have been if
they should have attempted to do so. Again, we turn to the judgment of the IMT
for the facts. A few of the ultimate conclusions stated therein will serve our
purpose. We quote the following brief excerpts from that judgment: |
| |
“According to the principle
(the leadership principle of the NSDAP), each Fuehrer has the right to govern,
administer, or decree, subject to no control of any kind and at his complete
discretion, subject only to the orders he received from
above.” |
| * * * * * * * * * * * |
__________
* Ibid., page
176
1174 |
. 
