 |
VI. CRIMES AGAINST PEACE —
COUNTS ONE
AND FOUR |
| |
| A. Introduction |
| |
All of the defendants were charged with crimes against peace in
counts one and four of the indictment (sec. I). Count one (sec. I, par. 1)
alleged their participation “in the initiation of invasions of other
countries of wars of aggression in violation of international laws and
treaties, including but not limited to planning, preparation, initiation, and
waging wars of aggression, and wars in violation of international treaties,
agreements, and assurances.” Count one contained thirty further paragraphs
of specification.
Count four (sec. I, par. 64) alleged that all the
defendants participated “* * * in the formulation and execution of a
common plan and conspiracy to commit, and which involved the commission of,
crimes against peace (including the acts constituting war crimes and crimes
against humanity, which were committed as an integral part of the crimes
against peace) * * *.”
Shortly after the defense began the presentation of its case, the
Tribunal granted a defense motion for an acquittal of all defendants under both
the aggressive war counts. This dismissal was based upon a defense motion of 11
March 1948, filed soon after the conclusion of the prosecution's case in chief.
The Tribunal granted this defense motion on 5 April 1948, finding that the
prosecution had not proved a prima facie case of guilt as to any
defendant.
Since the dismissal of the aggressive war charges was based
upon the insufficiency of the prosecution's evidence as of the conclusion of
the prosecution's case-in-chief, the evidence reproduced herein in the section
on aggressive war has been selected entirely from the evidence proffered during
the prosecution’s case-in-chief (sec. B). Only contemporaneous documents
have been included. These contemporaneous documents are followed by a
discussion on the record during which the Tribunal sought out the prosecution's
position as to the legal effect of violations of the armament limitations of
the Versailles Treaty (sec. C). Then follows the defense motion for a judgment
of not guilty on the charges of aggressive war, together with the defense
memorandum in support thereof (sec. D), and extracts from the
prosecution’s answer to the defense motion (sec. E). Additional
argumentation on aggressive war appears in the opening statements of both the
prosecution and the defense (sec. IV). |
239 |
. 
