Nuremberg Not A Defense
Dear editor:
Personal responsibility, respect for law and personal judgment. When do these individual qualities need to be recognized and put into action?
These are the basic questions that were asked over 60 years ago at the end of the Second World War when a series of trials were held in Nuremberg, Germany, from November 1945 to October 1946. They were held by the International Military Tribunal comprised of judges from France, Russia, Great Britain and the United States. The lead prosecutor was from the United States. The purpose of these trials was to determine if twenty-four former Nazi leaders were responsible for their actions of committing and conspiring to commit crimes against humanity during the war. The defense presented by the attorneys for the twenty-four was that they were just following orders from higher authorities, which became known as the “Nuremberg Defense.” The tribunal rejected these arguments and twenty-one of the defendants were found guilty. Basically the world was saying that individuals are responsible for their actions and that no amount of direction from higher authority could justify actions that were against recognized international law and that the ends did not justify the means.
Now, in twenty-first century America, a version of the “Nuremberg Defense” is being offered for the CIA officials and operatives who used “harsh interrogation techniques” with the department's legal blessing. It has been claimed that “It would be unfair to prosecute dedicated men and women working to protect America for conduct that was sanctioned in advance by the Justice Department.” In addition officials said that they would provide legal representation at no cost to CIA employees subjected to international tribunals or inquiries from Congress. They also said they would indemnify agency workers against any financial judgments. This position and authority comes directly from President Obama in the White House.
I can well appreciate the president's desire to "keep peace" with those that followed horrible instructions from higher authority. But, "forgiving government agents who may have committed heinous acts they were told were legal," is nothing more than justifying and allowing the "Nuremberg Defense" used by Nazi officials who said they were just soldiers and officials following instructions with approval from higher ups in the Hitler regime. Sorry, but that defense didn’t float in 1946 and it doesn’t today. The New York Times said it best, “Whether or not to prosecute law breakers is not a political decision. Laws were broken and crimes were committed.”
It is time for the United States to step up and reclaim its world leadership by showing respect for international law and human dignity. Even though former Vice-President Dick Cheney claims the ends justify the means, which has been shown to be highly questionable, no amount of self serving defense should be allowed. Our country is either one of laws and a respected member of the international community or it is not.
Personal responsibility, respect for law and personal judgment. When do these individual qualities need to be recognized and put into action?
These are the basic questions that were asked over 60 years ago at the end of the Second World War when a series of trials were held in Nuremberg, Germany, from November 1945 to October 1946. They were held by the International Military Tribunal comprised of judges from France, Russia, Great Britain and the United States. The lead prosecutor was from the United States. The purpose of these trials was to determine if twenty-four former Nazi leaders were responsible for their actions of committing and conspiring to commit crimes against humanity during the war. The defense presented by the attorneys for the twenty-four was that they were just following orders from higher authorities, which became known as the “Nuremberg Defense.” The tribunal rejected these arguments and twenty-one of the defendants were found guilty. Basically the world was saying that individuals are responsible for their actions and that no amount of direction from higher authority could justify actions that were against recognized international law and that the ends did not justify the means.
Now, in twenty-first century America, a version of the “Nuremberg Defense” is being offered for the CIA officials and operatives who used “harsh interrogation techniques” with the department's legal blessing. It has been claimed that “It would be unfair to prosecute dedicated men and women working to protect America for conduct that was sanctioned in advance by the Justice Department.” In addition officials said that they would provide legal representation at no cost to CIA employees subjected to international tribunals or inquiries from Congress. They also said they would indemnify agency workers against any financial judgments. This position and authority comes directly from President Obama in the White House.
I can well appreciate the president's desire to "keep peace" with those that followed horrible instructions from higher authority. But, "forgiving government agents who may have committed heinous acts they were told were legal," is nothing more than justifying and allowing the "Nuremberg Defense" used by Nazi officials who said they were just soldiers and officials following instructions with approval from higher ups in the Hitler regime. Sorry, but that defense didn’t float in 1946 and it doesn’t today. The New York Times said it best, “Whether or not to prosecute law breakers is not a political decision. Laws were broken and crimes were committed.”
It is time for the United States to step up and reclaim its world leadership by showing respect for international law and human dignity. Even though former Vice-President Dick Cheney claims the ends justify the means, which has been shown to be highly questionable, no amount of self serving defense should be allowed. Our country is either one of laws and a respected member of the international community or it is not.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home