 |
| of the other big firms of the Ruhr. He is not a criminal just as is
none of the other defendants in the dock here. |
| |
| I. Opening Statement for the Defendant
Eberhardt¹ |
| |
DR. SIEMERS: May it please the Tribunal. I have the honor today to
make the opening statement in the third and the last of the trials of
industrialists in Nuernberg. The first trial against industrialists, namely the
trial against the Flick concern has already been concluded by the verdict of
the American Military Tribunal of 22 December 1947. In fundamental questions
this verdict was pronounced in favor of the German industry. It followed
largely the arguments of the defense and consequently rejected many theses of
the prosecution.
The second trial of the industrialists against the
I.G. Farben concern is still within the stages of presentation of evidence by
the defense and the third trial of industrialists, that is, the one of interest
here against the Krupp concern, will now begin with the defense.²
In comparing the indictments and the opening statements by the
prosecution in these three trials a remarkable similarity is manifest which
goes so far as to show the prosecution using the same exaggerating expressions
in all three trials. To my dismay, the prosecution fully disregarded the old
latin proverb, “Variatio Delectat” in these three trials.
Counsel for defense in the third trial therefore finds it difficult to be
versatile if the prosecution en their part have remained dull and neglected to
offer proof of their ability, that is, if they have not varied their points.
This is not a reproach arising solely from the sphere of aesthetics however
much I must admit that I find this sufficiently important. It is moreover a
point which involves more and touches the juridical and philosophical sphere.
Roosevelt's and his Allies' intention, upon which the trial before the
International Military Tribunal in 1946 was based, did not only serve the
purpose of indicting the highest political, military, and Party leaders of
Germany, but beyond that it contained the sound and great idea to establish the
most important principles of international law, binding for the whole world,
binding for victor and vanquished. To a certain extent this aim has been
accomplished. Unfortunately however it is the prosecution who endanger this
goal by not complying with the principles of the IMT judgment but by deviating
from it wherever the judgment contradicts their own |
__________
¹ Opening statement is
recorded in mimeographed transcript, 22 March 1948, pp. 4799 4815.
²
Dr. Siemers was a defense counsel in each of three industrialist trials and in
the IMT trial.
192 |
. 
