A. On 8 June Bernau had been liberated from the Communists, He called himself temporarily authorized president of state, and as
Q. What was the reaction of the Commander in Chief of the German Army?
A. The German Commander in Chief reacted to this with set up, particularly local or field command offices.
After that, and I had to return immediately.
I left for Latvia, and in Latvia had its effects in Latvia.
In Latvia, very early the German civilian and as part of the work of this Reich Commissar and the concerns of
Q. How were you pointed then?
A. I said before, on 18 August I returned to Bernau in Estonia together with Dr. Kleist, and in his presence I talked to and negotiated with him.
General von Rock was very understanding,
Q. What do you know about the situation in Tartu at the time?
A. I left Bernau the same dry, for Tartu. Tartu had been mained for some time on the Embach River.
This river goes right through the center of the city of Tartu, and serious fighting between the Estonian self-defense and the German army, and on the other hand between the Red Army, had taken place.
In Tartu, owing to this fighting, people were very much embittered because, among others, Tartu was the place where mass murders had been carried out. In the prison of Tartu, 192 highly esteemed citizens were murdered by the Communists.
MR. GLANCY: May it please the Tribunal, we accept the good doctor as a political authority, but we fail to see the relevance of his statements as far as it concerns the activities of Sandberger. On these grounds we object to this line of testimony.
THE PRESIDENT: Dr. Mandry, it isn't yet evident just what the relevancy of this is. I presume he is leading up to something very specific. Would you please indicate to the Tribunal what you intend to establish by this witness?
DR. VON STEIN: Your Honor, the questions which I address as preliminary questions to the witness now have the purpose of describing whether the statements that the defendant himself will make later on in the witness stand are correct. First of all, the question whether it is right that at the time he heard in Pretzsch about the position in the Estonian territory, whether he was ordered to......... The truth I want to establish through statements of this witness, who is an expert on his country. I consider it important whether the witness came there from Estonia as one who was only informed through propaganda, or whether the actual facts which he saw himself conformed with the truth. For that reason I ask to be allowed to put all these questions.
THE PRESIDENT: Do I understand, Dr. von Stein......I think I got your name incorrectly first........that you are going to establish that the defendant Sandberger, when he arrived at Pretzsch, was confronted with a certain situation. He was informed that conditions were such in Estonia. And you want to confirm that the report given to him correspond with fact?
DR. VON STEIN: Yes, your Honor.
THE PRESIDENT: Yes. Now, that is relevant, but we yet don't have the specific statement that the defendant was confronted with, so we don't know what this witness is going to confirm. That is our difficulty.
DR. VON STEIN: Your Honor, the further questions which this witness will confirm as actual facts are these questions....... that work was carried out in Estonia. He will describe exactly his activity, how Sandberger acted there, whether his activity mainly consisted of police security tasks, or whether his activity consisted of different subjects mainly.
THE PRESIDENT: Well, does this witness actually know Sandberger? Did he see him in Estonia?
DR. VON STEIN: Yes, your Honor. All these years.
THE PRESIDENT: Well, we will permit you to question, and then Mr. Glancy - if you find that you believe it is becoming irrelevant we will hear another objection.
BY DR. VON STEIN:
Q: Witness, in the city of Dorpat, who was responsible at the time?
A: The first Germans who arrived in Dorpat on 11 July 1941 were the units and the men of the local commander of Dorpat. The field commander, Colonel Bosebruch, arrived on 12 July, and since fighting went on for weeks all authorities and units were subordinate to the field commandant of Dorpat.
Q: What measures did this Colonel Boseruch take?
A: I can only describe measures insofar as they concerned with prestige... he was very strict.
MR. GLANCY: One moment, please. If it please the Tribunal, we have had the testimony of this witness to the effect that he returned on the 18th of August. He is now testifying as to happenings on the 11th of July. This is merely hearsay.
THE PRESIDENTS: Isn't that correct, Dr. von Stein?
DR. VON STEIN: Your Honor, the witness testified before that certain conditions in Estonia he knows from reports and official documents; other facts he witnessed himself when he was in Estonia. What the witness tells us now probably concerns these things which he also knows, not only from hearsay but also from documents; and beyond that, your Honor, it does not depend so much on the actual facts but the witness also testified that this Collnel Bosebruch stayed not for one or two days, but two years. For that reason I submit that the objection of the Prosecutor be overruled.
THE PRESIDENT: Where the witness is testifying as to actual knowledge, he certainly can speak with greater amplitude than where he is speaking only from study. So it would seem to the Tribunal that when the witness is going to tell us something which he only read -- that then he abbreviate his statement and make it very short because obviously it isn't something of his own first-hand knowledge.
BY DR. VON STEIN:
Q: Witness, may I therefore ask you to be very brief on the following questions. I repeat the question... What measures did Colonel Bosebruch take. Please only talk about the fact whether this Colonel Bosebruch carried out arrests immediately, and to what extent this was done.
A: Colonel Bosebruch had given orders that all persons arrested be handed over to the field commandant in Dorpat, and he judged these people and disposed of them.
Q: What happened to these persons who were arrested?
A: I cannot say this from my own knowledge, but I know from reports, that minor Communists who only deserved small punishment were shot by him, and we considered this to be brutal.
Q: Witness, when did the independent power of the field commanders cease to exist?
A: On 20 September 1941, when the Rear Army Territory because part of that area.
Q: Witness, I am now telling you about the document which the Prosecution filed against Sandberger.
DR. VON STEIN: Your Honor, this is a document in Volume II-A. I can state the contents very briefly. It may not be necessary, your Honor, that this be read out. There is only one question from the document. Volume II-A English page 86-a, the following is being said in this document:
"In the district of the city of Dorpat since the occupation of the city by German troops, 291 persons were arrested, were put into a camp which the field commander set up. In this time, that is, after the German troops occupied the city, 405 persons, 50 of them Jews, were executed."
THE PRESIDENT: Did you say this is on page 86?
DR. VON STEIN: 86-A.
THE PRESIDENT: What is the document number? We don't find it.
DR. VON STEIN: Exhibit 46.
THE PRESIDENT: What document number?
MR. GLANCY: Sir, it is NO-3149, to be found on page 88.
THE PRESIDENT: Oh, I see; he's reading from page 88. Very well, Thank you.
Q: (By Dr. von Stein): Witness, I presume that you did not know anything personally about these events. I address the general question to you. Insofar as conditions in this city in the district of Dorpat became known to you, do you consider it possible that these measures were carried out under the responsibility of the German field commander.
A: Yes.
Q: If I understand you correctly, at that time --- in July and August, and possibly beyond that --- in the city and district of Dorpat, it was like this... That subordinate authorities, whether Estonian or German, actually could not exercise any power but all tasks were handled by the field commandant exclusively... Is that right?
A: Yes, that is how it is. The field commandant of Dorpat had set up an administration department. I also had to deal with this at a later time.
Q: Witness, I now come back to the question, when and how you met Sandberger?
A: I met Dr. Sandberger, as I said, on 30 August 1941 in Talinn.
Q: When were you assisted by Dr. Sandberger for the first time?
A: Immediately after meeting him I considered it the first task to help the families of tens of thousands of people who had been deported. For that purpose, all our charitable organizations and churches were invited to help, and together formed an organization of the Estonian People's Assistance and I asked Dr. Sandberger to obtain permission from the Army commanders. He did this.
Q: And what was your power, your authority?
A: On 20 September 1941, I was appointed as a member of the Estonian independent administration. Five men with the same rights were appointed, who were authorized to issue directives with legal strength. They were all independent, but, as I said, they considered me practically to be the chief, and accepted me as such because until then I had conducted all negotiations and was asked to continue to do so.
Q Witness, what was the competency of the self administration? up, concerning the territory, we were not competent for the whole of Estonia because not the whole of Estonia had been freed from the enemy. Only on 21 October, 1941 the whole of Estonia was under our competence.
Q When was the German Civilian Administration set up in Estonia? with a general commissar at the head of it. The general commissar confirmed all laws and directives which we had made until then. and did Dr. Sandberger help you to overcome these difficulties? culties arose in every field. Whether it was a minor or a major question, the general and civilian administration wanted to take part in everything and interfere; and Dr. Sandberger took an interest in all minor or major questions and helped until a good relation with the German Civilian Administration had been established in August.
Q After the 30th of August, what did Dr. Sandberger hear from in on the Estonian personalities about the suffering of the Estonian people under the communists about the needs of the day and the discussions with Dr. Kleist, concerning the aims and the future of Estonia?
A I informed Dr. Sandberger about the fact of how Estonia had been occupied by the Soviet Union in 1940. I laid this down in an affidavit and submitted it to the Tribunal already, and I don't want to tire the Tribunal by repeating this orally, it deals with the violation of international law and of agreements between the Soviet Union and Estonia. I explained there the situation in detail and proved it through excerpts from documents. If the high Tribunal considers it right that I repeat this here orally, I will be glad to do so.
MR. GLANCY: If it please the Tribunal, international law, customs, usages and political background is not part of the charge. We are concerned with a very narrow channelized thing -- murder. I wish the witness would confine himself to his knowledge of Sandberger's activities and not concern himself with political surveys
THE PRESIDENT: I do believe, Dr. Von Stein, that your witness is sort of spreading out into territory which goes far beyond the limits of the indictment.
DR. VON STEIN: Your Honor, the witness just mentioned an affidavit which he submitted. I consider it helpful that the witness makes his statements before this Tribunal orally so that the Prosecution cross examine the witness afterwards about those points they want the witness to explain. I want to say the following: I consider it of great importance whether the witness will confirm to us here what he himself told the defendant Sandberger about conditions in the country, in which Sandberger was active at the time. Based upon these facts in particular, the Tribunal can get an opinion on the statements which might be used in the defense of the defendant; whether they are afterwards confirmed with the truth; whether they conform to the truth. is certainly relevant, but it doesn't seem that your question was restricted to such a narrow proposition as that. Put your question again.
DR. VON STEIN: Your Honor, my question is as follows: I addressed the question to the witness what he himself when he met Sandberger on the 30th of August told him about the suffering of the Estonian people as a consequence of the occupation by the Soviet Union. Your Honor, all those things were told the defendant in Pretzsch at the time, and the Tribunal should know whether this information was merely propaganda or whether these are facts and truths that actually occurred. Your Honor, it is also of importance for the attitude of any defendant, whether the defendants were lied to; it is a difficult thing when the defendants here heard something from people who should have been experts, or came to decisions through their own experiences.
THE PRESIDENT: Well, we will permit the question, Dr. Von Stein.
Do you know what the question is? I am asking the witness if he knows what the question is. BY DR. VON STEIN: asking you what information did you give to Dr. Sandberger on the 30th of August about the suffering of the Estonian people under the communists. Witness, I now ask you not to refer to your affidavit which we do not know, but I ask you to describe the things as they occurred at the time; therefore, what did you tell Sandberger at the time.
A It's like this. I informed Dr. Sandberger when I met him, about events in Estonia, and for that purpose, first of all I explained to him, since people abroad know very little about Estonia in general, that Estonia is a sovereign state and a member of the League of Nations. In the year 1939 it had been given an ultimatum by the Soviet Union, with the request to sign an agreement of assistance and friendship with the Soviet Union, on the basis of which the Soviet Union wanted to use some areas in Estonia for military purposes. In the agreement it has been expressly mentioned that the Soviet Union in no way wanted to interfere with the domestic affairs of Estonia. In the summer of 1940, the conference of the Baltic foreign ministers took place in Talinn, as had been previously announced by the Soviet Union; when the Ministers were asked whether they objected to this Treaty. During the conference of the Baltic foreign ministers, Estonia, like other Baltic states, was given an ultimatum of six hours saying that Estonia did not want to accept the Soviet Union together with all other Baltic states.
THE PRESIDENT: You had better repeat that entire statement so that there will be no question as to just what the witness said. Estonia wanted to attack the Soviet Union, and for that reason, for security sake, the Soviet Union requested that the Soviet troops enter Estonia immediately, and appointed a new government that would accept and sign this agreement of friendship.
Soviet troops did enter Estonia; the government resigned. The Soviet Union, on their part, called its plenipotentiary to discussions with the state president; the president of the Soviets in Leningrad Shdanow, at the time he was president there. The Russian local commander immediately requested that they be given the right to held meetings as they wanted to.
THE PRESIDENT: When did all this take place? What was the date?
A On 26th June, 1940. May Icontinue?
THE PRESIDENT: Yes.
ing of Faustenhof and announced that: He had appointed this government and this government would immediately arrange for elections to be held for the parliament. These elections were set for the 14 and 15th of July, 1940. During these elections, three days before the elections, all candidates who did not belong to the communist party were crossed off the list, and instead of elections which should have taken place according to the Estonian constitution, only those candidates were elected who belonged to the communist party. The votes were not publicly counted; the results of the election were not made known according to election districts; in Estonia election procedure is the same as that in England, but only the total result was made public namely that 92 per cent of the voters had voted for the communists after that. This first chamber of the parliament convened, while the second chamber, the second house of parliament which had been intended by the Estonian Constitution -
THE PRESIDENT: Witness, did you tell all this to Sandberger? about Estonia. I did not explain this only to him, but I had to explain it to every German who was active in Estonia because we could not expect them to understand us if we didn't explain to them what actually happened in Estonia, and we did not want to be governed-
THE PRESIDENT: Did you tell each German who came into your country about the election; and how many were in the one chamber and how many in the other chamber?
A Yes. To all functionaries who could make decisions concerning us I had to explain all this; nor only I, but possibly also my colleagues because I did not meet every functionary.
THE PRESIDENT: Well, suppose you try to abbreviate it; don't give it to us so much in detail.
A Yes, to say it briefly, I informed Dr. Sandberger that according to our opinion Estonia was governed in violation of the agreement with the Soviet Union, and of International law, and had been occupied illegally.
Immediately after the occupation by the Soviet Union, Estonia, was declared as a state, annexed to the Soviet Union, and the Soviet authorities started to be active in Estonia. As to the sufferings of the Estonian people in particular, this was first of all the activity of the NKWD; secondly, the deportations of ten thousands of Estonians carried out in an inhuman and brutal manner; and the activity of the elimination battalions.
MR. GLANCY: One moment, witness; one moment, please. If it pleas the Tribunal, the Prosecution has no desire to suppress any evidence which might help to clarify the defendant Sandberger's position and listening for almost twenty-five minutes, to the testimony which the witness has given
THE PRESIDENT: Do you still tell us, witness, that you told all this to Sandberger?
THE PRESIDENT: Sandberger had a lot of leisure time apparently.
A I didn't understand.
THE PRESIDENT: Sandberger had a lot of leisure time apparently.
A Well, I didn't tell him all this all at once.
THE PRESIDENT: What did you do, meet every once in a while and you would sit down in a rocking chair and you would tell him this long story about Estonia's history? And it was my duty to inform these German authorities who had to make decisions concerning us.
THE PRESIDENT: What did you do? we wanted to avoid. For that reason I explained to him the situation which he found there, and perhaps could understand. I told him the causes and the reasons. I told him that there were three institutions and actions. This was in connection with the NKWD, the deportations and the elimination battalions who terrorized our people to such an extent that we were really quite desperate, and for that reason the people asked that communists who had taken part in these actions be punished.
MR. GLANCY: In order to abbreviate proceedings, the Prosecution is willing to concede that the defendant Sandberger was fully briefed by the good Doctor, now present, on all political history in Estonia, and the things that brought the entry and the occupation which preceded the occupation. If he would just summarize, it would help a great deal.
THE PRESIDENT: There did all these conversations take place, witness, at your home or in his office; or, while you were out taking a little stroll?
A No, in the office of Dr. Sandberger, in Talinn.
THE PRESIDENT: And he would put aside all his affairs and listen to you talk?
THE PRESIDENT: He must have been. to him in several days. Unfortunately, my explanation to this question cannot be brief. I will be glad to restrict myself to the statement that the Estonian people were aroused because of all the communist functionaries, and that in Estonia there was not a single family who had not suffered personally under this.
THE PRESIDENT: Over what period of time did these conversations take place, so that you finally were rails to acquaint Sandberger with the story of your country's turmoils? How long did it take you to tell him this story?
THE PRESIDENT: I am afraid we can't give you that much time here. We are a little busier than Sandberger appeared to be at that time, so, during the recess, suppose you try in your mind to condense the story and then when we reconvene again at 1:45, give it to us a little more tersely than you gave it to Sandberger in 1941.
(A recess was taken until 1345 hours, 7 November 1947.)
(The hearing reconvened at 1345 hours, 7 November 1947)
THE MARSHAL: The Tribunal is again in session.
DR. HJALMAR MAE - Resumed DIRECT EXAMINATION (CONTINUED)
DR. VON STEIN: May I proceed?
THE PRESIDENT: You may. BY DR. VON STEIN:
Q. Witness, we stopped at your explanation of conditions in Esthonia. Now, in order to hasten the procedure, I want to put precise questions to you which I want you to answer briefly. What did Sandberger learn from you, about the first big action of the NKWD, which took place on 14 July 1941 in Esthonia?
A. I informed him that on the 14 June 1941, that is, before the beginning of the war and during the period of the peace and friendship agreement between the Soviet Union and Esthonia -- in the night of the 14th June -- that people were arrested and imprisoned: 3512 men, 3024 women and 3067 children. These victims were respected Esthonians and wellknown in public life or in local life. They were also workers, of course, even farmers; and of those seized and deported ones, in order to give an idea of it, were people from newly-born children to people of 82 years of age of all classes of the population. This deportation was quite unexpected and took place in front of the whole population because the trucks, with barbed wire, were at this railway station before the eyes of the population and the whole situation created among the population desperation and hate against Bolshzvism, because considering the population of Esthonia, practically every family was hit by this measure.
Q. That did Sandberger find out through you and other Esthonian personalities concerning Extermination Battalions.
A. I told him that Extermination battalions were active in all circles and all territories in Esthonia, by order of...
MR. GLANCY: One moment, please. If it please the Tribunal, we again wish to renew our objections on the same basis as before. These occurrences, as far as we can see, have no relevancy to one charges as ledged against the defendant Sandberger in the indictment. These are purely collateral and are not connected in any way, matter or form which we can see.
DR. VON STEIN: Your Honor, the defendant Sandberger, as all the other defendants, is charged with being guilty of shooting many Communists. I want to clarify with the help of this witness which Communists were shot at that time and what the attitude of the Esthonian population was as to this. Therefore I think these questions are relevant.
MR. GLANCY: The Esthonian population is not being charged before this Tribunal, merely the defendant Sandberger, sir.
THE PRESIDENT: Dr. von Stein, what did the attitude of the population have to do with the defendant's action? Do you intend to submit that the defendant went there to execute the will of one Esthonian population?
DR. VON STEIN: No, your Honor. I want to emphasize two points. The first is what did Snadberger know about these things when he resolved the order in Pretzsch. Secondly, the execution of this order, as I shall prove, was not only carried out on the part of the German authorities but also largely by the Esthonian Civilian Guards in self defense. which Sandberger at that point entered, it is of great importance to show the attitude of the Esthonian people towards Communism.
THE PRESIDENT: Well, we will permit the question and the objection will be overruled; but I think you should try to bring it as quickly as possible to the real issue in the case, namely, whether Sandberger was guilty of any crimes.
DR. VON STEIN: Yes, your Honor. BY DR. VON STEIN:
Q. Witness, I repeat the question to you: What did you tell Sandberger concerning the extermination battalions?
A. Extermination battalions had been installed by order of the Commissar of Interior Matters in all the Sectors who had the order to work independently without any examination or investigation against everybody who spread rumors and who were regarded as Soviet enemy elements or those who were regarded to be against the occupation powers and to eliminate such elements which otherwise could come into the hands of the enemies. -- as regards the Deportation....
THE PRESIDENT: Just a moment. You used the words "enemy" and "occupying power." Now, in that part of the world who was an enemy today might be a friend tomorrow; who was occupying today would be an invader tomorrow because at one time Germany and Russia were fighting side by side. So that, use the name of the nation and of the nationals, otherwise some difficulty might arise in trying to determine just whom you are referring to.
THE WITNESS: Yes. I beg your pardon, your Honor.
A. (Continuing) there was an order by the People's Commissar for Interior Affairs. Germany was regarded as an enemy because, at that moment the country was in Soviet Russian hands.
THE RESIDENT: What year was that?
THE WITNESS: That was In July, 1941. War was at that time waging within the country. These extermination battalions COURT II CASE IX did not only fight the enemy, that is, Germany, but also they fought Esthonians at the actual places because Esthonian men, as they were afraid of deportation, had fled into the woods, and forests and the moors and there tried to protect their families when extermination battalions were approaching.
opinion, quite a number of defenseless, innocent people and not only murders alone, but also tortures which we regarded as inhuman; for this reason the population was so much enraged against the extermination battalions, that in the front lines in which Estonian Defense police had arrested members of the Extermination Battalions, these were dealt with immediately there and then.
THE PRESIDENT: These elimination battalions, who were they? I told you to use the name of the nation. Otherwise we are going to get into a lot of amgiguity.
THE WITNESS: Yes. These elimination battalions consisted on the Soviet side and the Esthonian side. The Esthonian self-defense organizations which operated in the woods and forests and in case of fights had arrested members of these battalions who had committed murders shot them there on the spot, through a court martial. Therefore, I made the effort, that is why I talked to Sandberger about this, to prevent these independent acts in these places and I tried to introduce an actual examination immediately because I did not want illegal and impossible circumstances to prevail in the front areas.
Q. Witness, did you tell the defendant Sandberger about the losses on the part of the Esthonians through the actions of these elimination battalions or other actions by the Communists?
A. On the whole, Esthonia lost, until the end of October 1941, 108,000 members of the population. Of these losses there are about 65,000 people which were lost in these actions.
Q. What is the whole population of Esthonia?
A. 1.2 million inhabitants.
Q. Witness, is it true that the Esthonian population was generally of the opinion that one had to recokno with the fact that these Esthonians which were deported by the Russians, were taken to Russia or would be taken to Russia and would be killed there and was it the opinion of the Esthonians that the German Security Police found out about this?
THE PRESIDENT: That question is not clear to the Tribunal. I don't know if it is to the witness.
DR. VON STEIN: The witness has just explained that large numbers, thousands and tens of thousands of the population were deported. He told us that the total losses were far beyond a hundred thousand of which a large part had already lost their lives before this action. I now put the question to the witness, what the attitude of the Esthonian population was and what they thought about the fate of the remainder of the deported people, whether the Esthonians were of the opinion at that time that they would over see their family members again or whether they had to reckon that they would probably be killed in Soviet Russia and would never return to their home country. I think this question important for the reason that the witness will tell us that the population must be very much embittered and that these matters must have influenced the population so much that they organized their own self defense and retaliation measures and that is how the number of thousandsof people appears in the documents.