Language:
English
Year of publication:
1994
Titel der Quelle:
Israel Law Review
Angaben zur Quelle:
28,4 (1994) 601-625
Keywords:
Arendt, Hannah,
;
War crime trials
;
Holocaust, Jewish (1939-1945)
;
Nuremberg Trial of Major German War Criminals, Nuremberg, Germany, 1945-1946
Abstract:
Analyzes the basis for the Nazi war crimes trials (Nuremberg, Eichmann), highlighting the views of Hannah Arendt and Robert Jackson, chief prosecutor at Nuremberg. Since the special courts and their legislation had been created post-factum, a crucial criterion in their deliberations was the individual's ability to tell right from wrong. Defends Arendt's view that Eichmann's actions stemmed from his lack of self-reflection rather than deep-seated evil. Argues that the Israeli court was right to condemn Eichmann, both as a moral duty to the victims and as a defense of civilization in general. Discusses both Churchill's view that the Nazis' fate was a political not a judicial question and the American legal positivism which led to the Nuremberg Tribunal's establishment. While the Crimes Against Peace and War Crimes Courts could exist (uneasily) on the basis of the need to protect the international status quo, the Crimes Against Humanity Court had to resort to the concept of "universal values" trampled by the defendants. Argues that though modern thought has emphasized the relativity of moral values, there exists moral dialogue within everyone, the abandonment of which justifies punishment.
URL:
Locate this publication in Israeli libraries
