"In 1945, the international community faced for the very first time the issue of bringing to trial the government of one of its renegade members." - Historian Richard Overy

Unprecedented Challenges

- As early as 1943, Allies decided to put Nazi war criminals on trial despite no previously existing legal guidelines. 
"There were, I suppose, three possible courses: to let the atrocities which had been committed go unpunished; to put the perpetrators to death or punish them by executive action; or to try them. Which was it to be? Was it possible to let such atrocities go unpunished? Could France, could Russia, could Holland, Belgium, Norway, Czechoslovakia, Poland or Yugoslavia be expected to consent to such a course?" - Sir Geoffrey Lawrence, British Judge in the IMT

The Moscow Conference 

Spiridonovka Palace, site of the Moscow Conference
(Wikimedia Commons)

In late 1943, Ministers of Foreign Affairs of Great Britain, the Soviet Union, and the US met to discuss strategies, including strategy for addressing German human rights violations and breaches of international agreements, ultimately authorizing a formal trial for Nazi war criminals.

The London Charter







In 1945, the London Charter was released, outlining the rules for the International Military Tribunal (IMT).
The London Charter in full; key points highlighted in yellow

The Charges: The Basis of the IMT and Modern International Law

Mouse over images for quote from London Charter describing each charge
(Images: History Channel)

The IMT Judges

Each allied nation had one judge, and they must vote 3-1 for a verdict to be final.
Francis Biddle, USA
(Wikimedia Commons)
Iona Nikitchenko, Soviet Union 
(Wikimedia Commons)
Sir Geoffrey Lawrence, Great Britain
(Nuremberg Memorium)
Henri Donnedieu de Vabres, France
(UN Audiovisual Library of International Law)

The IMT Prosecution Teams

Prosecution teams had several attorneys, but chief prosecutors were most active in the trial proceedings.
Robert H. Jackson, American Chief Prosecutor
(Robert H. Jackson Center)
Roman Rudenko, Soviet Chief Prosecutor
(PBS)
Hartley Shawcross, British Chief Prosecutor
(Wikimedia Commons)
François de Menthon, French Chief Prosecutor 
(French National Assembly)

Prosecution Goals

Instead of focusing solely on punishing Nazi leaders, the prosecution focused on establishing a precedent of international responsibility to protect human rights and prevent/prosecute aggressive war.
Robert H. Jackson on the charge of Aggressive War
(The Legacy of War, PBS)



“The charges in the indictment that the defendants planned and waged aggressive war are charges of the utmost gravity. War is essentially an evil thing. Its consequences are not confined to the belligerent states alone, but affect the whole world. To initiate a war of aggression, therefore, is not only an international crime; it is the supreme international crime, differing only from other crimes in that it contains within itself the accumulated evil of the whole.” - Official Statement of the International Military Tribunal

Seeking Out a Paper Trial

Workers organize thousands of pages of evidence
(US Holocaust Memorial Museum)


Teams of researchers had access to Nazi public records in order to build a case against the defendants. 

Selecting Defendants 



Defendants were selected on the basis of their level of influence in the Nazi government and connection to Nazi war crimes, though the US had final say since they held most of the defendants in custody.
(Image Credits: University of Missouri)