Nuremberg Trials (1945–1946)
BLUF
The Nuremberg Trials (International Military Tribunal, IMT) were the foundational proceedings of international criminal law, conducted 20 November 1945 to 1 October 1946 before a tribunal of four Allied powers (United States, United Kingdom, France, Soviet Union) against 24 major figures of the Nazi regime. The IMT established three categories of international crime — crimes against peace, war crimes, and crimes against humanity — that remain the core of international criminal law. It rejected the “superior orders” defense, establishing individual criminal responsibility for state actors regardless of official status. Twelve defendants were sentenced to death; ten were hanged at Nuremberg on 16 October 1946. The Nuremberg Principles, codified by the UN International Law Commission in 1950, form the direct legal foundation of the Rome Statute (1998) and the International Criminal Court.
Charges
The London Charter of the IMT (8 August 1945) defined three categories of crime:
1. Crimes Against Peace: Planning, preparation, initiation, or waging of a war of aggression, or a war in violation of international treaties.
2. War Crimes: Violations of the laws or customs of war — murder, ill-treatment or deportation to slave labor, killing of hostages, plunder of public or private property, wanton destruction of cities, towns or villages.
3. Crimes Against Humanity: Murder, extermination, enslavement, deportation, and other inhumane acts committed against any civilian population, before or during the war; or persecutions on political, racial, or religious grounds.
The new category. “Crimes against humanity” was a legal innovation: it was the first formal recognition that states could be held accountable for how they treated their own citizens under international law — prior to Nuremberg, international law regulated only inter-state conduct.
Defendants and Verdicts
| Defendant | Role | Verdict | Sentence |
|---|---|---|---|
| Hermann Göring | Luftwaffe Commander; #2 Nazi | Guilty (all 4 counts) | Death (suicide before execution) |
| Rudolf Hess | Deputy Führer | Guilty (2 counts) | Life imprisonment |
| Joachim von Ribbentrop | Foreign Minister | Guilty (all 4 counts) | Death |
| Wilhelm Keitel | Wehrmacht Chief of Staff | Guilty (all 4 counts) | Death |
| Ernst Kaltenbrunner | SS/RSHA Chief | Guilty (2 counts) | Death |
| Alfred Rosenberg | Eastern Territories Minister | Guilty (all 4 counts) | Death |
| Hans Frank | Governor-General of Poland | Guilty (2 counts) | Death |
| Julius Streicher | Der Stürmer publisher | Guilty (1 count) | Death |
| Albert Speer | Armaments Minister | Guilty (2 counts) | 20 years |
| Karl Dönitz | Naval Commander/Reich President | Guilty (2 counts) | 10 years |
| Hjalmar Schacht | Economics Minister | Acquitted | — |
| Franz von Papen | Vice-Chancellor | Acquitted | — |
| Hans Fritzsche | Propaganda official | Acquitted | — |
Three defendants were acquitted; twelve were sentenced to death (Göring committed suicide; ten were hanged 16 October 1946).
Key Legal Precedents
1. Individual Criminal Responsibility
The IMT rejected the argument that state officials acting in their official capacity could not be held personally liable under international law. The Charter explicitly stated: “The fact that the Defendant acted pursuant to order of his Government or of a superior shall not free him from responsibility, but may be considered in mitigation of punishment.” This principle — that individuals, including heads of state, bear personal criminal responsibility for international crimes — is the foundational principle of all subsequent international criminal tribunals.
2. The Superior Orders Defense Rejected
The “I was following orders” defense (Befehl ist Befehl — “orders are orders”) was explicitly rejected. The tribunal held that moral choice was possible even under totalitarian authority; that persons who executed manifestly unlawful orders shared criminal responsibility for their execution. This principle directly shapes contemporary military law of armed conflict across all NATO forces.
3. Crimes Against Humanity — Scope
The tribunal construed crimes against humanity narrowly: crimes against a state’s own citizens were cognizable only in connection with the war. This limitation was corrected by subsequent instruments — the Genocide Convention (1948) and the Rome Statute (1998) both extend jurisdiction to purely internal atrocities.
4. The Dolus Specialis Precursor
The Holocaust evidence before the tribunal — systematic, intent-driven extermination — created the evidentiary and conceptual basis for Raphael Lemkin’s genocide concept and the 1948 Genocide Convention. The dolus specialis standard (requiring proof of specific intent to destroy a group) in the Genocide Convention draws directly on the IMT’s treatment of the evidence of intent underlying the Holocaust. See South Africa v. Israel (ICJ Case 192) for the contemporary application of this standard.
Subsequent Nuremberg Proceedings (1946–1949)
The US Nuremberg Military Tribunals conducted 12 additional trials (the “Subsequent Nuremberg Trials”) under Control Council Law No. 10, covering: doctors (medical experiments), Einsatzgruppen commanders (mass shootings), judges (judicial murder), industrialists (slave labor), and military generals. The Doctors’ Trial established the Nuremberg Code (1947) — the foundational document of medical ethics and informed consent in research.
Institutional Legacy
Nuremberg Principles (1950): The UN International Law Commission, tasked by the General Assembly, codified seven Nuremberg Principles including: crimes against peace, war crimes, and crimes against humanity constitute international crimes; individuals bear responsibility regardless of domestic law; official position does not exempt from responsibility; superior orders do not exempt from responsibility (though may mitigate punishment).
Genocide Convention (1948): Adopted by the UN General Assembly on 9 December 1948 (one day before the Universal Declaration of Human Rights), the Genocide Convention created the crime of genocide as a distinct category, defined dolus specialis, and obligated state parties to prevent and punish genocide. South Africa v. Israel is litigated under this Convention.
ICTY/ICTR: The ad hoc tribunals for Yugoslavia (1993) and Rwanda (1994) applied and developed Nuremberg precedents in the post-Cold War era. The ICTR Akayesu judgment (1998) — first genocide conviction under the Genocide Convention — drew directly on Nuremberg’s treatment of specific intent.
Rome Statute and ICC: The permanent International Criminal Court, established by the Rome Statute (1998), is the institutional fulfillment of Nuremberg’s principle of individual criminal accountability under international law. See Rome Statute (1998).
Key Connections
- South Africa v. Israel (ICJ Case 192) — dolus specialis standard for genocide directly derives from Nuremberg-era Genocide Convention; Nuremberg accountability architecture is cited in the ICJ proceedings
- Rome Statute (1998) — the ICC is the direct institutional heir of Nuremberg’s individual-criminal-accountability principle
- Rwandan Genocide 1994 — ICTR applied Nuremberg-derived Genocide Convention; Akayesu judgment is the first post-Nuremberg genocide conviction
- Law of Armed Conflict — superior orders doctrine, distinction principle, and civilian protection obligations in LOAC derive from Nuremberg precedents
- United Nations — the UN Charter (1945) and Genocide Convention (1948) emerged from the same postwar order as Nuremberg; UN General Assembly endorsed Nuremberg Principles (1946, 1950)
Sources
| Source | Type | Confidence |
|---|---|---|
| International Military Tribunal. Trial of the Major War Criminals Before the International Military Tribunal, Nuremberg, 14 November 1945 – 1 October 1946. 42 volumes. Nuremberg: IMT, 1947–1949. | Primary, tribunal records | Fact, High |
| London Charter of the International Military Tribunal (8 August 1945). UN Treaty Series, vol. 82. | Primary, founding instrument | Fact, High |
| Nuremberg Principles, UN International Law Commission (1950). | Primary, codification | Fact, High |
| Tusa, Ann and John Tusa. The Nuremberg Trial. Skyhorse Publishing, 2010 (orig. 1983). | Secondary, scholarly | Fact, High |
| Taylor, Telford. The Anatomy of the Nuremberg Trials. Knopf, 1992. | Primary-adjacent (Taylor was US Chief Counsel at Nuremberg) | Fact, High |