MR. LAFOLLETTE: Perhaps the Court will suspend ruling on this, and I will bring it in to is afternoon after lunch.
THE PRESIDENT: That is right. The ruling is reserved.
DR. SCHILF: May I ask you to reserve No. 40 for this exhibit; and I will now go over to the next exhibit. It is a letter from prison authorities here in Nurnberg to the senior public prosecutor here in Nurnberg. It is page 26; it concerns the Jankovic files. Most of the Jankovic files have already been introduced by the Prosecution here. Jankovic was sentenced to death, and no clemency was granted; but he was not executed because he was able to escape. The fact that he was not executed is evident from this document. I offer it as Exhibit 41.
THE PRESIDENT: There being no objection, the exhibit is received.
DR. SCHILF: According to my sequence I should now offer Document Book VI. Document Book VI was supposed to be handed to me this morning it was supposed to be finished last night, but I didn't get it. I merely wanted to ask the Tribunal ---
MR. LAFOLLETTE: So far as I know it is only distributed in the German, and I received a German copy , but no English. I don't know whether the Secretary General has received it this morning or not.
DR. SCHILF: In regard to this document book --
THE PRESIDENT: How many numbers do you want reserved for that book?
DR. SCHILF: For this document book I would ask you to reserve No. 42 through 56. Document Book VI deals only with the notorious judges letters, and with the so-called guidance letters. May I now pass on to Document Book VII. On page 3 to page 22 there is a summary of these laws and ordinances, generally only the heading, and the beginning of 1944 until the surrender in 1945, signed with his name in the Reich Gesetzblatt, there are thirty-one ordinances there. In comparison there are eleven ordinances which were signed by Klemm as under secretary.
To make that summary clearer, I ask you to admit Exhibit 57, that is Thierack's thirty-one ordinances from the Reichsgesetzblatt, and Exhibit 58 Klemm's eleven ordinances from the Reich Legal Gazette. The heading shows largely that Klemm, as under secretary, signed for altogether insignificant matters.
THE PRESIDENT: You are submitting that as purporting to be a complete list of the ordinances signed by Klemm?
DR. SCHILF: Yes, Your Honor, a complete list. On page 23 of the document book No. 7, I am introducing an affidavit by Dr. Wilkerling.
THE PRESIDENT: Just a moment. Apparently your paging has been omitted.
DR. SCHILF: Is it not page 23? It follows the list of Klemm's ordinances. At the top right --
THE PRESIDENT: Just a moment.
MR. LAFOLLETTE: I believe that it apparently follows page 12.
THE PRESIDENT: You are now discussing Exhibit No. 59?
DR. SCHILF: I am beginning with 59. In the English document book at the right hand top corner -- I really cannot feel myself responsible for the fact that in the English document book there is no pagination. The German document book has a pagination and that is the way I submitted it.
THE PRESIDENT: Exhibit 59 begins on page 25 if properly numbered. You may proceed.
DR. SCHILF: Exhibit 59 is the number for Dr. Wickerling's affidavit. Dr. Wikerling from 1940 onward, until February, 1945, worked at the Reich Ministry of Justice. In this affidavit he gives an account of Dr. Thierack's methods at work, particularly with reference to penal matters. He points out that after Thierack assumed office, as Minister of Justice, all penal matters were dealt with by him in such a way that reports had to be made to him. The department chiefs and the under secretaries were pushed into the background by Thierack. I offer this as Exhibit 59.
THE PRESIDENT: The exhibit is received. Just a moment, you have offered 57 and 58 also. Those exhibit are received; they are also received.
DR. SCHILF: The next document appears on page -
THE PRESIDENT: Page 27.
DR. SCHILF: Thank you, Your Honor, 27. It is an affidavit by Mattern. Mattern, too, worked at the Reich Ministry of Justice. In his affidavit he describes in detail Klemm's position as under secretary, comparing it with Thierack's position. He also describes the character of Thierack, which is accordance with the statements by the witnesses here, and with the statement of Klemm himself in the witness stand. I offer this document as Exhibit 60.
THE PRESIDENT: The exhibit is received.
DR. SCHILF: The next document appears on page 31 to 32. It is an affidavit by Stagel Stagel, at the time when Klemm was under secretary, was the expert on civil law as far as Austrian cases were concerned. However, he describes a few cases where Klemm, as under secretary, rejected interference by party authorities. I offer document as Exhibit 61.
THE PRESIDENT: Exhibit 61 is on page 29; the exhibit is received.
DR. SCHILF: There will not be a number 62 because that was the Hecker affidavit and Hecker has already been examined on the witness stand.
The next document is an affidavit by Dr. Hupperschwiller. Dr. Hupperschwiller was the expert of department 15. The Tribunal will recall that department 15 was the department which had been set up temporarily, branch of department 5, the department which dealt with the administration of punishment. That department 15 dealt with cases concerning the transfer of prisoners to the police. The affiant described in detail what was Klemm's position in department 15, that is to say, he had nothing to do at all with department 15. No reports were made to him, et cetera. I offer this document as Exhibit No. 63.
THE PRESIDENT: The Exhibit is received.
DR. SCHILF: I am now asking the Secretary General whether supplement 7 is there, in the English translation, I mean. This contains two affidavits that bear the numbers 63-a and 63-b. The first affidavit was given by Dr. Kriege. Dr. Kriege in August, 1944, was arrested by the Gestapo because it had been intended to appoint him to a leading position in case the attempt on Hitler of the 20 of July, 1944, had come off. Dr. Kriege described in detail facts concerning Klemm and says that he was protected. The end of the affidavit deserves attention. There Klemm's character is described and it is said that he and his political friends I am mentioning it because of that, he speaks of himself as an opponent of the Third Reich and of his friends as opponents of the Third Reich; their position had been that Klemm in a position under Thierack had always been open to a consideration of humanity. I offer this document as Exhibit 63-A.
THE PRESIDENT: Received.
DR. SCHILF: The next document in the supplement volume is an affidavit by Dr. Bruns, who also worked for a great number of years in the Ministry.
He also cites for us examples of individual cases, describing Klemm's attitude, who was in favor or a more lenient treatment of the case in opposition to Thierack. I offer this as exhibit 63-B.
THE PRESIDENT: 63-B is received. It will be observed, however, that there is no paging consecutively through your supplement document book. 63-b will be page 3.
DR. SCHILF: Your honor, may it please the Court, may I point out that according to the German 63-B, Exhibit 63-B, we have had instructions to give a number also the index, 63-A, page -------, 63-B, page 5, that is how it is numbered in the document book.
THE PRESIDENT: However, in the document books there should be some pagination started with the beginning of the book and running to the end of the book. There is none here. We have numbered the book.
DR. SCHILF: May it please the Court, I am sorry about that but I have no influence on the pagination of the English documents. My German book was submitted in an orderly pagination. May I now ask the Tribunal to turn to the next document book, book 8 -
MR. LAFOLLETTE: If Your Honors please, just so that we may possibly make some plans for an orderly procedure this afternoon, unless we receive the English of book 6, I think all that is available now are books 8 and 9 for Kelmm. We will get through with those undoubtedly early in the afternoon. There seems to be some announcement about some other books but I don't know what they are.
THE SECRETARY GENERAL: I and 2.
MR. LAFOLLETTE: 1 and 2 for Klemm we have already put that in.
THE SECRETARY GENERAL: They haven't been used.
MR. LAFOLETTE: Book 1 and 2 for Klemm?
THE PRESIDENT: I have a note here which shows that the Rothenberger and Lautz books are ready.
MR. LAFOLLETTE: That is just why I was going to speak, Your Honor, there was delivered to us yesterday books I through 4 for Rothenberger and two of the Lautz books, two additional Lautz books.
THE PRESIDENT: We will proceed with the document books, whatever is ready.
MR. LAFOLLETTE: 2-B and 4-B for Lautz were received yesterday, and I think there was a 4-C. -- have the documents in that book been put in, Dr. Grube, in 4-c?
DR. GRUBE: There has been introduced now book 1, 2-a, and 3-a, and furthermore a few days ago I obtained book 4-c, and I now have some, Mr. Lafollette, but 2 isn't here I think nor is 4.
MR. LAFOLLETTE: The Prosecution has the books to continue with Rothenberger and Lautz this afternoon, Your Honors. I will waive the 24 hour rule.
DR. SCHILF: Document book 8, I hope the pagination is in order. It begins on page 36, an affidavit by Frau Reichert. Frau Reichert was the woman supervisor of the women's prison at Rothenfeld. She recounts two incidents, the story of her employment at the suggestion of Klemm, although she was a member of the Social Democratic party, prior to 1937. The second occurrence, and Klemm has already testified to this on the witness stand, that he in the case American troops were to approach, had given certain instructions for the release of prisoners and to turn over the remaining prisoners to the American troops. I offer this document as Exhibit 64.
THE PRESIDENT: The Exhibit is received.
MR. LAFOLLETTE: If Your Honors please, with reference to Exhibit 40, I find that the ruling of the Court was made on the same day that Dr. Schilf made his affidavit and I withdraw my objection.
THE PRESIDENT: Very well Exhibit 40, Klemm exhibit 40 is received. The objection has been withdrawn.
DR. SCHILF: The next document is an affidavit by Dr. Lammers and I will not introduce it as Dr. Lammers appeared on the witness stand here.
The next document is an affidavit by Wilkerling. It begins on page 8 of the document book and ends on page 10, I beg your pardon, on page 11. Wilkerling was on the staff of the Ministry in 1944. He describes an occurrence which concerns Madgeburg and the administration of justice there. He gives a detailed description of how after an air raid on Madgeburg the German population had been too friendly with Allied airman who had bailed out. That was the view of the local party agency. The people who had been too friendly in their treatment of the Allied Airmen were arrested and Klemm saw to it that they were released. I offer that document as Exhibit 66.
THE PRESIDENT: The exhibit is received. We will recess until one-thirty this afternoon.
(The Tribunal adjourned for the noon recess.)
AFTERNOON SESSION (The Tribunal reconvened at 1330 hours)
THE MARSHAL: The Tribunal is again in session.
DR. SCHILF: May it please the Tribunal, before the recess I stopped with document book VIII. May I now ask you to turn to page 12 of document book VIII? On page 12 there is quite an interesting document, although it is only an excerpt from a newspaper item. It is a newspaper clipping of 27 November 1946. This document is introduced in relation to the lynching of allied fliers.
This is a newspaper notice from the newspaper "Nuerenberger Nachrichten", and it is entitled, "They Threatened to hang Papen". In this notice it is stated that after Papen was acquitted by the IMT, the public was aroused to the extent that it could have lead to lynching, and that the Police President of Nurnberg declared that he was not willing to protect von Papen.
I offer this newspaper clipping document 67, as Exhibit 67. For the purpose of the record -
THE PRESIDENT: It is appearing that no objection has been made, and in spite of the fact that at least one member of the Tribunal is unable to see the slightest relevance in this document, it may be received for such probative value if any as it may be found to have.
DR. SCHILF: Your Honor, for the record, I am in doubt whether Exhibit No. 66 has already been received in evidence as an exhibit.
THE PRESIDENT: It has been received.
DR. SCHILF: Thank you very much.
The next document, on page 15 of The document book, is an affidavit by the former Undersecretary in the Reich Chancellery.
The Undersecretary in the Reich Chancellery was a subordinate of Dr. Lammers; his name is FriedrichWilhelm Kritzinger.
This affidavit deals with the occurrences which led to the drafting of the so-called civil servant court martial order. The civilian court martial order is very important in the Montgelas case, which happened here in Nurnberg. This affidavit states in detail that the administration of Justice, especially Klemm, were not in favor of having the Party or the Police alone appoint the members of the civilian court mar tial, but that the administration of Justice should appoint the judges and the prosecutors. The affidavit is of the 30th of June 1947.
MR. LA FOLLETTE: I object to the affidavit for the reason that the affiant is in the Nurnberg jail and can be produced as a witness.
THE PRESIDENT: Is the affiant still in jail here?
DR. SCHILF: Your Honor, I cannot tell you whether he is still in jail here; I don't know.
MR. LA FOLLETTE: The last information available to me, Your Honor, is that he is in the Nurnberg jail. Of course, they are shifted, but the information I had yesterday was that he was here.
THE PRESIDENT: The exhibit will not be received at this time.
DR. SCHILF: I now come to the supplementary volume of document book VIII; the supplement to document book VIII. This contains two documents. I call them 68-A and 68-B. May I ask the Secretary General to distribute the copies to the Tribunal?
I believe the English translations are not yet available.
May I ask the Tribunal to reserve the numbers 68-A and 68-B?
THE PRESIDENT: We will reserve those numbers.
DR. SCHILF: The next document book is No. IX.
The first document is an affidavit made out by Hans Willers, and this begins on page 3 of the document book and ends on page 7. Willers, an official of the Ministry of Justice from 1929 on, first worked in the Prussian Ministry of Justice and, after that was dissolved, had been transferred to the Reich Administration of Justice, until 1940. He worked on personnel matters in the Reich Ministry of Justice at the end; that is, he had the position of a Ministerial Dirigent. It is known to the Tribunal that, as Undersecretary, the defendant Klemm had a great deal to do with personnel matters.
Willers, who was an old, experienced civil servant and had a great deal of experience in personnel matters, states in detail what Klemm's attitude was in promotions and appointments of officials. It is especially interesting in this document -- and that is why I want to direct the attention of the Tribunal to it -- on page 4, towards the end of the page, Willers reports the feeling that existed in the Ministry when they heard that Klemm came from the Party Chancellery. That fact alone, that he was appointed from that organization to the Ministry, gave rise to fears that he would increase the influence of the Party. Willers states that these fears soon proved to be unfounded. He then states further details, and I will refrain from referring to any other passages in this affidavit. I offer it as No. 70.
THE PRESIDENT: Apparently you have omitted your number 69. There is no 69?
DR. SCHILF: I beg your pardon. May I ask the Tribunal to change the two numbers that the Tribunal is reserving for me in supplementary volume VIII? Instead of using 68-B, use number 69. They would then be numbered 68-A and 69.
MR. LA FOLLETTE: If your Honor please, before we need to read Exhibit 71, which is Miethsam, I should like to point out that Miethsam, while not technically in Nurnberg, lives -- Dr. Schilf tells me that he will not offer it.
THE PRESIDENT: Exhibit 70 is received.
DR. SCHILF: I skip Exhibit 71, because of the fact that the affiant Dr. Miethsam was here as a witness.
The next document, on page 12, is an affidavit by Mrs. Catharina Frohboese. It was given on the 16th of June 1947. Frau Frohboese was the secretary, first, of the defendant Dr. Rothenberger, and, after he left the Ministry, she was personal secretary to Ministerial Director Letz. Letz was Division Chief for personnel matters in the Ministry and he was subordinate to Klemm in regard to certain personnel matters.
Frau Frohboese describes the contrast between the personnel policy of, on the one hand, Thierack and, on the other side of Leitzand Klemm. I offer this document as Exhibit No. 72.
THE PRESIDENT: 72 is received.
DR. SCHILF: The last document in Document Book No. 9 on Page 14 - is a law or let us say a decree, which is for the simplificiation of the legal state examinations. The Tribunal knows that Klemm, as Chief of Department II had to deal with the question of legal education. This decree supplements the affidavits which have been submitted before. I offer this law as Exhibit 73.
THE PRESIDENT: The exhibit is received.
DR. SCHILF: I have a supplement to Document Book 9 which contains two documents. I don't know whether they are available already in English. Will the Secretary-General find out whether Document Book 9 Supplement is available in the English translation? It does not seem to be available. Then may I request the Tribunal to reserve No. 74 and No. 75 for me?
THE PRESIDENT: Yes, we will do that.
DR. SCHILF: I have thus concluded my submission of evidence as far as documents are concerned. I only want to make a reservation. I already mentioned that affidavits from Holland have been received today. I also expect a number of other documents from out of town. I ask for permission to be able to submit them later on at an appropriate time. Moreover, I beg your pardon that the document books were not quite in the proper form, especially as regards the pagination. I received them only yesterday and in part only today and I was not in a position to check on these technicalities.
May it please the Tribunal, on this occasion, since I have concluded my submission of evidence, may I introduce to the Tribunal my assistant counsel, Frau Dr. Lehmann, who will represent me in court?
THE PRESIDENT: You have made an order admitting her as your assistant, dated today. The Secretary-General will date it.
MR. LAFOLLETTE: There is just one thing I would like to know, perhaps. I had a list from the defense center that there would be five document books from Dr. Mettgenberg. I thought Dr. Schilf said yesterday that there would be none. I mean, I probably misunderstood. I would like to know how many Mettgenberg document books there will be, if I may, so that I can plan my appearance in court.
DR. SCHILF: For Dr. Mettgenberg five document books will be submitted. However, none of them are available as yet. In accordance with the ruling that was made by the Court yesterday I reported it in writing to the SecretaryGeneral.
DR. WANDSCHNEIDER: (Wandschneider for the defendant Dr. Rothenberger): May it please the Tribunal, actually it would be my place now to submit the document books. Unfortunately, of the five document books I received two this noon at twelve o'clock and I received them in loose sheets and only in the English translation. I still don't have the German copies of those either, but I have already discussed the matter with my colleague, Dr. Grube. He concurred and can now begin his submission of documents. For me the situation is somewhat difficult because of the total of five document books I have to have at least four of my document books here which have been submitted more that a month ago, and I need them especially also in the German translation.
I would be grateful if I would not have to split up these documents again, but could submit them altogether as a whole.
I have not yet been told a definite date when the rest of the document books, especially the German translations too, will be finished. I made my report today in accordance with the ruling.
THE PRESIDENT: Mr. La Follette -
MR. LaFOLLETTE: Yes, Your Honor?
THE PRESIDENT: Just a moment, before we proceed further. At the suggestion of the Court, after your statement concerning the number of translators who were alleged to be sitting in a room doing nothing, the Court made some investigation. My only suggestion is that you will ascertain by inquiry that the situation presented to me was presented somewhat in error. There is no great necessity of going into it unless you desire it, but I think it is clear that the translation department had not neglected to assign work to the people in the room, which you mentioned. I don't remember the name of the room.
MR. LAFOLLETTE: Well, a representative of the translation department called on me, your Honor. I have heard what they had to say.
THE PRESIDENT: Well, I think that the record should show that the criticism was made in error. That should be said in justice to the translation department.
MR. LAFOLLETTE: If your Honor is convinced of that, of course the record will show.
THE PRESIDENT: Yes, it will show that.
DR. GRUBE: May it please the Tribunal, this afternoon I intend to introduce Document Books II-B, IV-B and IV-C. I have just found out that Book III-B has also been translated into English. I would like to introduce that too today. I don't know whether the Prosecution agrees to that.
MR. KING: Did I understand Dr. Grube to say III-C is on the agenda for this afternoon?
DR. GRUBE: 111-B.
MR. KING: I apparently misunderstood. It is III-B.
DR. GRUBE. I refer first to Document II-B.
THE PRESIDENT: What was the last exhibit number? Was it 109?
DR. GRUBE: 109 was the last exhibit number, your Honor.
THE PRESIDENT: Thank you.
DR. GRUBE: In document Book II-B on Page 1, Document 225 is contained. May I interpolate? Document Book II-B is submitted for the general defense. The document No. 225 is an excerpt from the Reich Court of Criminal Procedure and deals with the question to what extent documents within the German criminal procedure can be brought into connection especially with the record. I offer this document as Exhibit 110.
THE PRESIDENT: The exhibit is received.
DR. GRUBE: On page 4 of the same document book is Document 184 and is an excerpt from the decision of the Reich Supreme Court in criminal cases and deals with the question to what extent police records can be used in the trial. It is laid down there that this can be done only to a very limited extent. I offer this document as Exhibit III.
THE PRESIDENT: The exhibit is received.
DR. GRUBE: Document No. 226 on Page 6 of the Document Book is also an excerpt from the Code of Criminal Procedure and deals with the right of the defendant to ask questions of witnesses, experts, etc. I offer this document as Exhibit 112.
THE PRESIDENT: Received.
DR. GRUBE: Document 227 on page 7 is also an excerpt of the Reich Code of Criminal Procedure and contains the various regulations about the final plea of the defense or the defendant or the defense counsel. I offer this document as Exhibit 113.
THE PRESIDENT: Received.
DR. GRUBE: Document No. 35 on Page 9 is an excerpt from the Commentary to the Code of Criminal Procedure by Loewe-Rosenberg, which has been mentioned repeatedly here and deals with the question to what extent the court is bound by pleas made by the defense and the prosecution. It is laid down that the court, in regard to the submission of evidence and the evidence itself, is in no way bound to the petitions. I offer this document as Exhibit 114.
THE PRESIDENT: Received.
DR. GRUBE: Document 229 on Page 11 is also an excerpt from the Reich Court of Criminal Procedure. It deals, above all, with the question to what facts in the case the opinion has to refer and it also goes into the question to what extent an extension of the decision is admissible if new facts result from the trial. I offer this document as Exhibit 115.
THE PRESIDENT: Received.
Court No. III, Case No. III.
DR. GRUBE: Document 33 on page 14 is also an excerpt from the commentary by Loewe-Rosenberg on the Code of Criminal Procedure. This document deals with the freedom of the judge to decide on the results of the of the evidence and that the judge may not go into files which were not submitted during the trial.
I offer this document as Exhibit 116.
THE PRESIDENT: Received.
DR. GRUBE: Document #28 on page 16 is an excerpt from the text book quoting the German criminal proceedings by Hippel. It says that there are no rules regarding evidence laid down by law and that the judge has to decide independently only on the basis of his free evaluation.
I offer this document as Exhibit 117.
THE PRESIDENT: Received.
DR. GRUBE: Document 113 is a decision by the Reich Supreme Court in criminal cases from volume 66 and also deals with the question what is meant by the opinion of the judge and whether any influencing of his decision exists.
I offer this document a.s Exhibit 118.
THE PRESIDENT: Received.
DR. GRUBE: Document 104 on page 21 is also an excerpt from the text book by Hippel and deals with circumstantial evidence.
I offer this document as Exhibit 119.
THE PRESIDENT: Received.
DR. GRUBE: Document 228 on page 23 is an excerpt from the Reich Code of Criminal Procedure and discusses the different possibilities of making a decision by the court.
I offer this document as Exhibit 120.
THE PRESIDENT: Received.
DR. GRUBE: Document 230 on page 25 contains the provisions of the Reich Code of Criminal Procedure about the decision and about the written opinion. It says that the judges who participated in the decision have to sign the opinion and the sentence.
I offer this document as Exhibit 121.
THE PRESIDENT: Received.
DR. GRUBE: Document 231 on pages 27 and 28 is also an excerpt from the Code of Criminal Procedure and contains the provisions regarding the transcript that has to be made of the trial. May I direct the attention of the Tribunal, among other things, to Article 274 where it is extablished that concerning the contents of those records dealing with formalities only proof of forgery is admissible, Dr. Schwarz, when he was examined here, also referred to this provision.
I offer this document as Exhibit 122.
THE PRESIDENT: Received.
DR. GRUBE: Document 232 on page 29 and the following pages contains the original provisions regarding the reopening of a case closed by virtue of a decision that has the force of law. May I direct the attention of the court to Section 359, paragraph 3.
I offer this document as Exhibit 123.
THE PRESIDENT: The exhibit is received.
DR. GRUBE: Document 274 on pages 35 to 36 of the German document book is again an excerpt from the commentary by Loewe-Rosenberg on the Code of Criminal Procedure and it is in connection with Paragraph 3, which I just mentioned, of Section 369. May I direct the attention of the Tribunal to #15 of this commentary where it says that only a breach of official duty will furnich valid cause for the reopening of a case when a judge, a juror, or a lay judge are guilty of such offenses.
I offer this document as Exhibit 124.
THE PRESIDENT: Received.
DR. GRUBE: Document 245 on page 37 contains Article 334 of the Reich Code of Criminal Procedure. I Introduced this provision because, in the preceding document, Exhibit 124, under #14, it is stated that the reopening of a case in regard to an offense which was a criminal offense, says that a violation of the official duty has to be the basis of this and this law provides for this.
I offer this as Exhibit 125.
THE PRESIDENT: Received.
DR. GRUBE: Document 241 is an excerpt from the Third Decree for the simplification of the administration of criminal lav of the 29th of May 1943, and deals with the simplification of the reopening of a case. Article 359, which I already mentioned before, was changed by this decree to the effect that the reopening of a case was possible under simplified conditions. May I direct the attention of the Tribunal to page 40 of this document where, following #3, it is said that the reopening which will be prejudicial against the defendent is only permissible if the new prosecution is necessary for the protection of the people.
I offer this document as Exhibit 126.
THE PRESIDENT: Received.
DR. GRUBE: Document 165 on page 41 as an excerpt from the commentary by Anschuetz on the Weimar Constitution which has already been mentioned here repeatedly and goes into the constitutional bases of the clemency procedure.
I offer this document as Exhibit 127.
THE PRESIDENT: Received.
DR. GRUBE: Document #166 also discusses the same question and it is an excerpt from the text book by Hippel concerning the German Criminal procedure.
I offer this document as Exhibit 128.
THE PRESIDENT: Received.
DR. GRUBE: Document 181 on page 44 to 47 is an excerpt from the Reich Code of Criminal Procedure and contains the most important provisions regarding the execution of penalties. May I direct the attention of the Tribunal to Article 453 on page 45. This is a provision which has been mentioned here very often and says that the execution is permissible only after the decision on the clemency has been made by the competent office.
I offer this document as Exhibit 129.
THE PRESIDENT: The exhibit is received.
DR. GRUBE Document 255 is an excerpt from the law concerning passing an execution of death sentences of 29 March, 1943.
I offer this document as Exhibit 130.
THE PRESIDENT: Received.
DR. GRUBE: Document 173 on page 49 and the following pages is an excerpt from the so-called provision concerning the execution of penalties. In Article 2 of this document it is pointed out what agencies are to be regarded as agencies for the execution of penalties. May I direct the attention of the Tribunal to Article 12 of this order, on page 52 of the document book? In this article it is provided what prisons are competent for the execution of prison sentences which have been pronounced by the peoples' court or the district court of appeals as first and last instances.
I offer this document as Exhibit 131.
THE PRESIDENT: Received.
DR. GRUBE: Document 193 is an excerpt from the commentary by Ebermayer regarding the Reich Penal Code. This document discusses whether the executing authority, the official executing the penalty, is authorized to review the order for execution which they got from the Reich Ministry of Justice regarding its proper jurisdiction and, in order to have uniform jurisdiction, this right of review is denied to the executing authority.
I offer this document as Exhibit 132.
Document 154 on page 55 is an excerpt from the regulation concerning administration of punishment of the Reich Ministry of Justice. May I direct the attention of the Court to the fact that under figures 8, 9 and 13 of this regulation it says what authorities have the supervision over penal institutions, prisons, penitentiaries, penal camps etc. From this document it can be seen that the two Senior Reich Prosecutors had no supervision over these penal institutions.
I offer this document as exhibit 133.