 |
| 2. Control Council Law No. 10 was enacted — |
| |
“In order to give effect to
the terms of the Moscow Declaration of 30 October 1943 and the London Agreement
of 8 August 1945 and the Charter issued pursuant thereto * * *.”
(Introduction to the Law) |
| |
| In consequence thereof, |
| |
“The Moscow Declaration of
30 October 1943 ‘Concerning Responsibility of Hitlerites for Committed
Atrocities’ and the London Agreement of 8 August 1945 ‘Concerning
Prosecution and Punishment of Major War Criminals of the European Axis’
are made integral parts of this law.” (Art. I, italics
ours). |
| |
| Thus the basic principles of the London Agreement coincide with the
basic principles of the Control Council Law and govern the interpretation and
application of this Law. 3. The London Charter and Control Council Law No. 10
were not intended to create new law, but to codify existing international
law.¹ |
| |
“The Charter is not an
arbitrary exercise of power on the part of the victorious nations, but * * * it
is the expression of international law existing at the time of its
creation.” |
| |
Control Council Law No. 10 was similarly applied by American
Military Tribunal IV in Case 5 against Friedrich Flick et al., only as a
“Codification of International Law.” The Tribunal commented:²
“No act is adjudged criminal by the Tribunal which was not criminal under
international law as it existed when the act was committed.”
For
the question to be decided here, the law to be applied according to the London
Charter is the same as the law to be applied according to Control Council Law
No. 10, namely, the international law in force at the time of the
commission of the acts declared by the prosecution to be criminal.
The
International Military Tribunal based its judgment upon this law in the
proceedings against the major war criminals. This Tribunal will have to base
its judgment upon this law.
4. All the defendants were accused before
the International Military Tribunal of participation in a conspiracy or common
plan for the commission of crimes against peace. Only 8 were sentenced, 14 were
acquitted.
In addition to these eight who received sentences, another
defendant was sentenced for the planning and preparation of wars |
__________
¹ Trial of the Major
War criminals, op cit. supra, vol. I, p. 218.
² United States
vs. Friedrich Flick, et al., transcript p, 10976, 22 December
1947.
358 |
. 
