Legacy of the Nuremberg Trials

A Pithy Contemplation

By Kristen Boyert
Kristen Boyert is a third year student at Albany Law School pursuing a certificate in International Law.  This past summer, she spent five weeks interning in Abidjan, Côte d’Ivoire researching and compiling a report on human rights issues during the 2011 post- electoral crisis for ONG Transparency Justice.  She serves as a Senior Editor for both International Law Studies and the Center for Judicial Process.
This essay was prepared for Professor Bonventre’s International Law of War and Crime Seminar, Fall 2012.

We must never forget that the record on which we judge these defendants is the record on which history will judge us tomorrow.  To pass these defendants a poisoned chalice is to put it to our own lips as well.

Justice Robert H. Jackson[1]

It is with the best intentions for repair and reconciliation that the Nuremberg Trials took place. The inception of the tribunal intended to repair the wounds so deeply inflicted upon a ravaged region, as well as aid in the prevention of further atrocities. However, the inherent inception of the Nuremberg Trials is based upon the victors, and as critics argue, the jurisdiction of the tribunal is dubious, among other issues.[2]

It is universally accepted—save for a misguided few—that actions taken by the Nazi government and Nazi officials alike rose above the horrors of war to an apex that “shocked the conscience of all civilized peoples . . . .”[3]  It also goes without saying that individuals should face the consequences of their actions. The tribunal “manifested the practicability of a fair trial of war crimes in an international tribunal . . . [and] [i]t established important precedents for the development of international law concerning the definition of certain crimes . . . .”[4]

Nevertheless, as George A. Finch and Quincy Wright discuss, the tribunal steps onto unsteady ground with this venture and opens itself to criticism.[5]  Both authors describe the notion that no country is without blame.[6]  Each has waged war and defended against it.[7]  Although the Nuremberg Trials stand as a glimmer of hope for good-intentions towards persecuting wrongdoers, it also leaves questions regarding jurisdiction and sentencing.[8]