 |
Buergin, Haefliger, Ilgner, Jaehne, Oster, Gajewski, Hoerlein, von
Knieriem, Schneider, Kuehne, Lautenschlaeger, Mann, and Wurster. The majority
opinion concedes, and, in fact, it is not seriously controverted in this case,
that slave labor, i. e., compulsory foreign workers, concentration-camp inmates
and prisoners of war, were employed and utilized on a wide scale throughout
numerous plants of the vast Farben organization and that such utilization was
known by the defendants. The majority reached the conclusion that, except in
the case of Auschwitz where initiative constituting willing cooperation by
Farben with the slave-labor program was held to have been proved, no criminal
responsibility resulted for participation in the utilization of slave labor.
Basically, the majority opinion under count three concluded that, in order to
meet fixed production quotas set by the Reich, “Farben yielded to the
pressure of the Reich labor office and utilized involuntary foreign workers in
many of its plants.” The majority assert 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.” But the majority fully accepts the defense
contention that the utilization of slave labor by Farben (except in the case of
Auschwitz) was the result of the compulsory production quotas and other
obligatory governmental decrees and regulations directing the use of slave
labor. The asserted defense of “necessity” is held to have been
sustained because of the reign of terror within the Reich and because of
possible dire consequences to the defendants had they pursued any other policy
than that of compliance with the slave-labor system of the Third Reich.
I concur in the conviction of the five defendants found guilty by the
Tribunal, but I am of the opinion that the criminal responsibility goes much
further than merely embracing the five defendants most immediately connected
with the construction of Farben's Auschwitz plant. In my view all the members
of the Farben Vorstand should be held guilty under count three of the
indictment, not only for the participation by Farben in the crime of
enslavement at Auschwitz, but also for Farben's widespread participation and
willing cooperation with the slave-labor system in the other Farben plants,
where utilization of forced labor in violation of the well-settled principles
of international law recognized in Control Council Law No. 10 has been so
conclusively shown. I disagree with the conclusion that the defense of
necessity is applicable to the facts proved in this case.
While it is
true that there were numerous governmental decrees under which complete control
of the manpower supply was assumed by the Reich Government, existence of such
controls does not, in my |
1308 |
. 
