 |
upheld in Germany. A parliamentary commission created by the German
Constituent Assembly to investigate charges made against that nation of having
violated international law during the war by a majority report¹ submitted
2 July 1926, stating that the deportations had been in conformity with the law
of nations and, more particularly, with the Hague Regulations. The report
proceeded upon the theory that “the workers in question did not find
sufficient opportunity to work in Belgium and that the measure was
indispensable for reestablishing or maintaining order and public life in the
occupied territory.” The Belgian Minister of Foreign Affairs expressed the
sentiment of the civilized world when he declared that his country had erred in
its belief “that at least on this point, the war policy of the Kaiser's
government would no longer find defenders.”² And it should be noted
in this connection that even a minority of the German parliamentary commission
above-mentioned found no justification for the practice and upon the other
hand, squarely condemned it.
It is apparent, therefore, that learned
counsel's contention that “the conscription of Belgian labor during the
First World War has remained a completely open question as regards its
admissibility wider international law,” is based upon the fact that a
majority of a committee appointed by the parliamentary body of Republican
Germany found it to be in accord with the law of nations. We think it must be
conceded that this is at least rather thin ground upon which to establish a
negation of international customary law. However this may be, it is certain
that this action by the majority of the committee of the German body did not
operate to repeal the applicable Hague Rules of Land Warfare, particularly
Article 52, which in the present case was shown beyond doubt to have been
violated. Deportees were not only used in armament production in the Krupp
enterprise, but in the latter years of the war the production of armament on a
substantial scale reached could not have been carried on without their labor.
This was not only a violation of the Hague Rule of Land Warfare but was
directly contrary to the expert opinion of the Reich Chancellery hereinabove
referred to which preceded the order of the German Supreme Command of 3 October
1916, for the deportation of Belgians. As above indicated, that opinion, though
providing a subterfuge for the illegal conduct, did annex as one of the
conditions “that forced labor is not carried on in connection with
operations of war * * *. Hence their employment in the actual production of
munitions should be avoided.” |
__________
¹ American Journal of
International Law (April. 1946) volume 40. page 312.
² Belgian Chamber
of Representatives, session 14 July 1927. Documents Legislatifs. Chambre des
Representants, No. 336. Passeleeq, pages 416-433.
1431 |
. 
