HistoryNet mastheadHistoryNetShop Summer Catalog

Japanese War Crime Trials

World War II  | 5 comments  | Print This Post  | Email This Post

By contrast, Delfin Jaramilla of the Philippines disagreed only in that he thought some of the sentences too lenient. H. Bernard of France found fault with the procedure of the tribunal, and therefore with the resulting judgment. B.V.A. Roeling of the Netherlands dissented in part, urging that Foreign Minister Hirota be acquitted since he could neither have known of atrocities nor prevented them. For similar reasons, he also voted to acquit four other defendants. At the same time, Roeling argued that three defendants who had been sentenced to life should have been given the death penalty for conventional war crimes.

The only complete dissent came from Radhabinod Pal of India. He had joined the tribunal quite late, after the British decision to grant independence to India. Pal’s long dissent argued that all the defendants should have been acquitted on all counts. Japan had acted in’self-defense,’ he said, ‘really driven to take action.’ The thousands of atrocities had been ‘all stray incidents,’ he continued, along the way attacking the American decision to drop the atomic bomb. Pal’s somewhat vitriolic dissent was generated by his complete commitment to ‘Asia for the Asians.’ In fact, he was a member of the Indian puppet army that served with the Japanese at a time when the vast majority of Indian soldiers remained true to their salt. One of the other judges believed Pal had come to the trial determined to vote for complete acquittal.

Before the curtain finally fell on the Tokyo trial, a final act was played out before the U.S. Supreme Court. Two defendants, Hirota and General Doihara, petitioned for review of their convictions. On December 20, 1948, the Supreme Court replied that it had no jurisdiction to hear the appeal; the International Military Tribunal was not a court of the United States, and therefore was beyond the Supreme Court’s power to review. Three days later, the Tokyo death sentences were carried out.

It is almost impossible to accurately compare the results of the Tokyo trial to those reached at Nuremberg, although some have charged, on no particular evidence, that the results at Tokyo were more severe toward the accused than the verdicts at Nuremberg. For what it’s worth, here are the numbers: 25 men were tried at Tokyo, all convicted; of 22 Nuremberg defendants, three were acquitted. There were 16 life sentences at Tokyo, only three at Nuremberg; but 12 Nazi defendants (including Martin Bormann in absentia) were sentenced to death, as against only five Japanese.

So the Tokyo prosecutions passed into history. If they had held center stage in the public eye, they were only a tiny fraction of the war crimes trials. The rest took place all across the Orient and did not end until 1951. These defendants–those who committed the acts and those who ordered them–were accused of more conventional crimes, violations of the laws of war and ordinary civilian crimes of rape, murder and maltreatment.

American military commissions required at least three members, almost always officers. One member ruled on evidentiary matters as ‘law member’; the law member was not required to be a lawyer, and usually was not. The accused–sometimes several of them–were entitled to counsel and to the production of evidence for the defense. All proceedings and sentences were reviewed by a staff of lawyers before approval.

Defense counsel, mostly American, worked hard and faithfully for their clients, and the American government expended many millions of dollars in finding documents and witnesses requested by the defense. Many trials turned into down-home dogfights between prosecution and defense. And if adversary trials took a little longer, they preserved the American tradition of fair play in the eyes of most observers. Commenting on the conduct of the trials, one American law professor paid the ultimate compliment: ‘The legal profession will say of defense counsel–’well done.”

The Yamashita case was the most famous of the American trials, but there were hundreds of others. One defendant was Lt. Gen. Matsaharu Homma, author of the Bataan Death March and the bombing of undefended Manila. Homma’s headquarters was less than 500 yards from the road down which suffering American and Filipino prisoners were marched; Homma admitted he had even driven down the road himself. From the evidence Homma had to have known what his men were doing on that blood-soaked road, and little criticism accompanied his hanging in April 1946.

In 1947, American authorities turned over to Filipino prosecutors the conduct of the remaining trials, including successful prosecution of Yamashita’s predecessor, General Shigenori Kuroda, charged with more than 2,800 deaths. In spite of the long and ugly occupation of the Philippines, this trial and the rest showed the same dedication to fairness that had characterized most of the American prosecutions. The chief defense counsel, a Philippine army captain, put it pretty well. ‘I am duty bound to see that every Japanese accused of atrocities is given a fair trial…,’ he said. ‘No right-thinking citizen would like to see the Philippines commit a historical blunder through its courts by allowing conviction of innocent people just because they were former enemies.’

The tribunals were scrupulously fair, and defense counsel fought as hard for their clients as they had under American administration…sometimes too hard. In one hotly contested case, the Filipino prosecutor and Japanese defense counsel came to blows in the courtroom. It is a testament to Filipino fair play that the defendant was acquitted in spite of the antics of his counsel.

In one spectacular display of generosity, Philippine President Manuel Roxas formally appealed to China’s Chiang Kai-shek to spare a Japanese officer accused of war crimes in China. This officer, wrote Roxas, had saved several Filipino lives, including Roxas’ own. Chiang Kai-shek granted the Philippine president’s request.

By the time trials in the Philippines were over, 215 Japanese had faced military commissions. Twenty had been found not guilty; 92 had been sentenced to death. But those proceedings were only part of the work. There was a great deal more to do.

Subscribe Today

Subscribe to World War II magazine

Pages: 1 2 3 4

Tags: , , ,

HistoryNet.com Subject Locator
  1. 5 Comments to “Japanese War Crime Trials”

  2. I think the article shows how “unfair” the punishments on Japanese were, I agree that how it is done is “unfair.” The punishments on Japanese imperialists were unfairly light compared to the hideous atrocities they have done on their victims.
    The trial was unfairly done because MacArthur wants a new, nice relationship with post war Japan, and therefore he lessened the number of Japanese who were supposed to be punished in the first place.

    Also, this article does not include the fact that MacArthur had let number of the war criminals (some of whom include class A war criminals) be free in order to get the Japanese research data on biological weapon which was experimented on alive Chinese, Korean, Filipinos etc by Japan, so that U.S can use it for its advantage in the future wars.

    By Jessia Cornelson on Nov 25, 2008 at 3:31 am

  3. Ah. Thank you. I’m doing this impossible report project thing on War Crimes during WWII. This is like just what I need. Keep it up!:)

    By Kiana on Mar 26, 2009 at 6:59 pm

  4. I have done intensive research on the Japanese medical experiments, the U.S. cover-up, and the comparison between the Nazi and Japanese Medical Experiments.
    From the information I have obtained through reliable sources, professors, and informative books on the subject I have discovered not one war criminal was punished. The court case took 2 1/2 years and most of the “guilty” criminals remained in prison till 1958, when they were released though some did die in prison all living were granted immunity based on a deal MacArthur made with General Ishii Shiro the chief medical doctor and genius bacteriologicist who represented Japan during the Geneva Convention of 1925 that banned biological and chemical warfare and research, which Japan blatantly ignored.
    If you want to use this article I would check the accuracy by looking up information about the cover-up of the crimes and Ishii Shiro the main man who started Unit 731 and the human medical experiments; more information lies with obtaining knowledge about him and MacArthur who was the main conspirator because Joseph Keenan, the chief prosecutor, gave MacArthur the decisive power handling the trials, who already had a plan and agreement with Shiro.
    This article is close to accurate; however, you need to read between the lines of the court case like how all of the Class A war criminals were given freedom, but that’s not mentioned in the text. Also Japanese medical experiments were equal if not worse than the Nazi’s. Look up the lack of anesthetics when they did vivisection’s on Chinese people, POWs, and many other POWS.
    There is a lot of more information needed to be discovered within this subject.

    By Jess on Apr 15, 2009 at 10:42 pm

  1. 2 Trackback(s)

  2. Dec 22, 2008: Should Top Bush Admin and House Intelligence Officials Be Tried for War Crimes? - Page 14 - US Message Board
  3. Apr 23, 2009: For Those Who Believe Waterboarding Isn't Torture: Would You Agree To Be Waterboarded - Page 10 - Political Forum

Post a Comment

Please note that HistoryNet Staff cannot respond to requests for research of any type. Please visit our research forum to post research questions. If you have a question about our magazines, please use the contact us form.

Related Articles



SPONSORED SITES







HistoryNet Article Archives Historynet Spacer

OPINION POLL

Which of these World War I aircraft was the best fighter plane?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

See previous polls

STAY CONNECTED WITH US

RSS Feed
 
Get Our Daily HistoryNet Email
 
 


What is HistoryNet?

The HistoryNet.com is brought to you by the Weider History Group, the world's largest publisher of history magazines. HistoryNet.com contains daily features, photo galleries and over 5,000 articles originally published in our various magazines.

If you are interested in a specific history subject, try searching our archives, you are bound to find something to pique your interest.

 Get our RSS!
 Newsletter Signup

From Our Magazines

Weider History Group

Weider History Network:  HistoryNet | Armchair General | Great History | Achtung Panzer!

Terms of Use | Copyright © 2009 Weider History Group. All rights reserved. Reproduction in whole or in part without permission is prohibited.
Contact Us|Advertise With Us|Subscription Help