| 词条 | Frankfurt Auschwitz trials | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 释义 |
|name = Frankfurt Auschwitz trials |court = Frankfurt |image = Saalbau-ffm-haus-gallus-003.jpg |imagesize = 260px |caption = Buergerhaus at Frankenalle in Frankfurt am Main-Gallus. Courthouse for the first Frankfurt Auschwitz Trial in 1963-65, 2009 photo |full name = Second Auschwitz trial (der zweite Auschwitz-Prozess) |indictment = 20 December 1963 |date decided = 19 August 1965 |subsequent actions = Verdict in the last Auschwitz/Lagischa case: September 1977 |transcripts = |judges = |number of judges = |related actions = |italic title = no }} The Frankfurt Auschwitz trials, known in German as der Auschwitz-Prozess, or der zweite Auschwitz-Prozess, (the "second Auschwitz trial") was a series of trials running from 20 December 1963 to 19 August 1965, charging 22 defendants under German criminal law for their roles in the Holocaust as mid- to lower-level officials in the Auschwitz-Birkenau death and concentration camp complex. Hans Hofmeyer led as Chief Judge the "criminal case against Mulka and others" (reference number 4 Ks 2/63). Overall, only 789 individuals of the approximately 8,200[1] surviving SS personnel who served at Auschwitz and its sub-camps were ever tried, of which 750 received sentences.[2] Unlike the first trial in Poland held almost two decades earlier, the trials in Frankfurt were not based on the legal definition of crimes against humanity as recognized by international law, but according to the state laws of the Federal Republic.[3] Prior trial in PolandMost of the senior leaders of the camp, including Rudolf Höss, the longest-standing commandant of the camp, were turned over to the Polish authorities in 1947 following their participation as witnesses in the Nuremberg Trial. Subsequently, the accused were tried in Kraków and many sentenced to death for violent crimes and torturing of prisoners.[4] Only SS-Untersturmführer Hans Münch was set free, having been acquitted of war crimes.[5] That original trial in Poland is usually known as the first Auschwitz Trial. Course of proceedings{{more citations needed|section|date=April 2017}}SS-Sturmbannführer Richard Baer, the last camp commandant, died in detention while still under investigation as part of the trials. Defendants ranged from members of the SS to kapos, privileged prisoners responsible for low-level control of camp internees, and included some of those responsible for the process of "selection," or determination of who should be sent to the gas chambers directly from the "ramp" upon disembarking the trains that brought them from across Europe ("selection" generally entailed inclusion of all children held to be ineligible for work, generally under the age of 14, and any mothers unwilling to part with their "selected" children). In the course of the trial, approximately 360 witnesses were called, including around 210 survivors. Proceedings began in the "Bürgerhaus Gallus", in Frankfurt am Main, which was converted into a courthouse for that purpose, and remained there until their conclusion. State Attorney General (Hessian Generalstaatsanwalt) Fritz Bauer, himself briefly interned in 1933 at the Heuberg concentration camp, led the prosecution. Bauer was concerned with pursuing individual defendants serving at Auschwitz-Birkenau; only 22 SS members were charged of an estimated 6,000 to 8,000 thought to have been involved in the administration and operation of the camp. The men on trial in Frankfurt were tried only for murders and other crimes that they committed on their own initiative at Auschwitz and were not tried for genocidal actions perpetrated "when following orders", considered by the courts to be the lesser crime of accomplice to murder.[6] At a 1963 trial, KGB assassin Bohdan Stashynsky, who had committed several murders in the Federal Republic in the 1950s, was found by a German court not legally guilty of murder.[7] Instead, Stashynsky was found to be only an accomplice to murder as the courts ruled that the responsibility for his murders rested only with his superiors in the KGB who had given him his orders.[7] The legal implication of the Stashynsky case were that the courts had ruled that in a totalitarian system only executive decision-makers could be convicted of murder and that anyone who followed orders and killed someone could be convicted only of being accomplices to murder.[7] The term executive decision-maker was so defined by the courts to apply only to the highest levels of the Reich leadership during the National Socialist period, and that all who just followed orders when killing were just accomplices to murder.[7] Someone could be only convicted of murder if it was shown that they had killed someone on their own initiative, and thus all of the accused of murder at the Auschwitz trial were tried only for murders that they had done on their own initiative.[6] Thus, Bauer could only indict for murder those who killed when not following orders, and those who had killed while following orders could be indicted as accomplices to murder. Moreover, because of the legal distinction between murderers and accomplices to murder, this meant that an SS man who killed thousands while operating the gas chambers at Auschwitz could only be found guilty of being accomplice to murder because he had been following orders, while an SS man who had beaten one inmate to death on his own initiative could be convicted of murder because he had not been following orders.[6] Bauer is said to have been opposed in the former purpose by the young Helmut Kohl, then a junior member of the Christian Democratic Union. In furtherance of that purpose Bauer sought and received support from the Institute for Contemporary History in Munich.{{citation needed|date=October 2016}} The following historians from the Institute served as expert witnesses for the prosecution; Helmut Krausnick, Hans-Adolf Jacobsen, Hans Buchheim, and Martin Broszat. Subsequently, the information the four historians gathered for the prosecution served as the basis for their 1968 book, Anatomy of the SS State, the first thorough survey of the SS based on SS records.{{citation needed|date=October 2016}} Information about the actions of those accused and their whereabouts had been in the possession of West German authorities since 1958, but action on their cases was delayed by jurisdictional disputes, among other considerations. The court's proceedings were largely public and served to bring many details of the Holocaust to the attention of the public in the Federal Republic of Germany, as well as abroad. Six defendants were given life sentences and several others received the maximum prison sentences possible for the charges brought against them.{{citation needed|date=October 2016}} DocumentationThe trial comprised 183 days of hearings held from 1963-1965. The 430 hours of the testimony of 319 witnesses, including 181 survivors of the Auschwitz concentration camp and 80 members of the camp staff, the SS, and the police were recorded on 103 tapes, and 454 volumes of files that were stored at the Hessian State Archives in Wiesbaden.[8] In 2017, the original magnetic tapes recording the main proceedings of the Frankfurt Auschwitz Trial, which focused the world's attention on the systemic industrialized mass-murder of the Holocaust, were submitted by Germany and included in UNESCO's Memory of the World Register.[8] OutcomesThe trial attracted much publicity in Germany, but was considered by Bauer to be a failure. Bauer complained that the media treated the accused in such a manner as to imply that they were all freakish monsters, which allowed the German public to distance themselves from feeling any moral guilt about what had happened at Auschwitz, which was instead presented as the work of a few sick people who were not at all like normal Germans.[6] Moreover, Bauer felt that because the law treated those who had followed orders when killing as accomplices to murder it implied that the policy of genocide and the Nazi rules for treating inmates at Auschwitz were in fact legitimate.[6] Bauer wrote that the way that the media had portrayed the trial had supported the[6] {{Quote|wishful fantasy that there were only a few people with responsibility ... and the rest were merely terrorized, violated hangers-on, compelled to do things completely contrary to their true nature.}}Furthermore, Bauer charged that the judges, in convicting the accused, had made it appear that Germany in the Nazi era had been an occupied country, with most Germans having no choice but to follow orders. He said,[6] {{Quote|But this... had nothing to do with historical reality. There were virulent nationalists, imperialists, anti-Semites and Jew-haters. Without them, Hitler was unthinkable.}}A public opinion poll conducted after the Frankfurt Auschwitz trials indicated that 57% of the German public were not in favor of additional Nazi trials.[9]
Additional trialIn September 1977 an additional trial was held in Frankfurt against two former members of the SS for killings in the Auschwitz satellite camp of Lagischa (Polish: Lagisza), and on the so-called "evacuation" (i.e. death march) from Golleschau (Goleszow) to Wodzisław Śląski (German: Loslau).[10] This and the previous trial inspired the one in the film The Reader. See also
Notes1. ^http://auschwitz.org/en/museum/news/personal-details-of-ss-men-from-kl-auschwitz-garrison-accessible-to-the-public,1239.html 2. ^{{cite book | last = Rees | first = Laurence | authorlink = Laurence Rees | title = Auschwitz: A New History | year = 2005 | publisher = Public Affairs | location = New York | isbn = 1-58648-303-X | pages = 295–296}} 3. ^{{cite web | last = Shik | first = Naama | authorlink = | coauthors = | title = The Auschwitz Trials | publisher = Yad Vashem, International School for Holocaust Studies | year= 2014 | url = http://www.yadvashem.org/yv/en/education/newsletter/10/auschwitz_trials.asp | accessdate = 2014-10-12}} 4. ^Paweł Brojek (Nov 24, 2012), Pierwszy proces oświęcimski (The First Auschwitz Trial). {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20131022014237/http://prawy.pl/portal_aktual/historia/37-rocznica/2110-pierwszy-proces-oswiecimski-czyli-jak-sadzono-niemcow-za-zbrodnie |date=2013-10-22 }} Portal Prawy.pl. Retrieved December 29, 2014. 5. ^[https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Holocaust/Munch.html Jewish Virtual Library Biography] 6. ^1 2 3 4 5 6 {{cite web|last=Fulford|first=Robert|authorlink=Robert Fulford (journalist)|title=How the Auschwitz Trial failed|publisher=National Post|date=June 4, 2005|url=http://www.robertfulford.com/2005-06-04-auschwitz.html|accessdate=2013-06-16}} 7. ^1 2 3 {{cite book|last=Wette|first=Wolfram|authorlink=Wolfram Wette | title=History, Myth, Reality|publisher=Cambridge: Harvard UniversityPress|year=2006|url=|page=245|format=}} 8. ^1 {{cite web|title=Frankfurt Auschwitz Trial|website=Memory of the World|publisher=United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization|url=http://www.unesco.org/new/en/communication-and-information/memory-of-the-world/register/full-list-of-registered-heritage/registered-heritage-page-3/frankfurt-auschwitz-trial/|access-date=2018-10-09}} 9. ^{{cite news|last1=Kinstler|first1=Linda|title=The last Nazi hunters|url=https://www.theguardian.com/news/2017/aug/31/the-last-nazi-hunters|accessdate=31 August 2017|work=The Guardian|date=31 August 2017}} 10. ^Neues Deutschland. Ausgabe vom 07.09.1977..uh{{de icon}} References
Further reading
External links
9 : Holocaust trials|Auschwitz concentration camp|Auschwitz trial|History of Frankfurt|Trials in Germany|1963 in West Germany|1964 in West Germany|1965 in West Germany|20th century in Frankfurt |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 随便看 |
|
开放百科全书收录14589846条英语、德语、日语等多语种百科知识，基本涵盖了大多数领域的百科知识，是一部内容自由、开放的电子版国际百科全书。