Now, I come to crimes against peace. With the next affidavit 20 Aug M LJG 8-4 Perrin I want to prove that the SD, in the border instance of August of 1939, the SD was not employed, and that the members of the SD did not have any knowledge of it.
Statement of Evidence, Roman number Five, page 23 of the English version.
In this connection affidavit SD 11, by Dr. Marx. The short summary of the contents is in the transcript of 9 July 1946.
Now I come to the war crimes, "Statement of Evidence" VI A of the Trial Brief against the Gestapo and SD, page 25 of the English version. In this connection I submit affidavit SD 41 by Karl Heinz Bent. The summary of the contents is in the transcript of 23 July 1946.
I have, furthermore, submitted on this point SD No. 42 by Walter Schellenberg. The summary of the contents is in the transcript of the 23 July 1946. SD 44 by Otto Ohlendorf. The summary of the contents is in the transcript of 23 July 1946.
I have submitted on this affidavit SD 45 by Erwin Schulz. The summary of the contents is in the transcript of 23 July 1946.
I have submitted on this point SD 46 by Otto Ohlendorf. The summary of the contents is also in the transcript of 23 July 1946. Leitabschnitte -- the Leaders Units, the Aussenstelle -- Branch Offices, and the Vertrauensmanner -- confidential agents -- had no knowledge of the activities of the Einsatzgruppen in the East.
In this connection I have submitted SD No. 47 by Wilhelm Duerhof, which refers to knowledge in the former Gau in South Hannover and Braunschweig. SD 48 by Karl Heinz Bent refers to knowledge in the former SD sector in Stettin, Breslau, Duesseldorf. Neustadt Weinstrasse and Saarbruecken. that the SD Abschnitt Telsidt participated in the liquidation of Jews and Communists in the border incidents, I shall submit a complete translation of my affidavit SD 12 by Wilhelm Sieps. The summary of the affidavit is in the transcript of 9 July 1946.
"Statement of Evidence" VI-A of the Trial Brief, page 25 of the English version. In this connection I submit the affidavit of Gerti Breiter, SD 69. on page 26 of the English Trial Brief against the Gestapo and SD, did not belong to the SD but the Gestapo. The summary is in the Transcript of 23 July 1946.
The next affidavit refers to "Statement of Evidence" VI F of the Trial Brief, page 54 of the English text. PS 532, is not the SD Inland Amt III or the Foreign Information Service of VI or VI, but the Security Police. In this connection I submit affidavit SD 52 by Wilhelm Keitel. The summary of the contents is in the transcript of 23 July 1946. justice. I have submitted SD 51 by Walter Schellenberg. Summary of the contents is in the transcript of 25 July 1946.
Furthermore, SD 68, by Hans Steiner. The summary of the contents is in the transcript of 3 August 1946. SD murdered prisoners in the prisons, in order to prevent their begin liberated by Allied troops. "Statement of Evidence" VI J, page 56 of the English version of the Trial Brief.
I have submitted SD 13 by Horst Laubel. The summary of the contents is the transcript of 9 July 1946. SD 14, by Fritz Welfbrandt, is in the same transcript. participated in the forcible confiscation of public and private property; "Statement of Evidence" VI K, page 57 of the English version. In this connection I have submitted SD 15 by Kurt Klauke. The summary of the contents is in the transcript of 9 July 1946.
SD persecuted Jews. "Statement of Evidence" VII A, English Trial Brief. I have submitted in this connection SD 16, by Walter Keinz. The summary of the contents is in the transcript of 9 July 1946. Moreover, SD 17, by Emil Hausmann, is in the same transcript. Also, SD 53, by Emil Proeschel, in the transcript of 23 July 1946, and SD 54 by Dr. Laube in the same transcript.
The next refer to the charge against the SD of persecution of the church: "Statement of Evidence" VII B, page 63 of the English text of the Trial Brief. being in the transcript of 23 July 1946. Walter Keinz, SD 18, in the transcript of 9 July 1946. summary of the contents being in the transcript of 9 July 1946.
the SD in the Government General. I shall later submit a complete translation of Affidavit SD 56 by Helmut Fromm, summary of contents in the transcript of 23 July 1946. called SD. I have submitted in this connection an affidavit by Dr. Laube, SD 23, summary of contents in the transcript of 9 July 1946. and KRIPO in Belgium and Northern France were the SS uniform with the SD insignia. I have submitted SD 24 by Walter Hofmeister, summary of contents in the transcript of 9 July 1946. Belgium and Northern France did not belong to Amt III. I have submitted SD #25 by Walter Hofmeister, summary of contents in the transcript of 9 July 1946. during the war was in general not voluntary but was based on legal order. In this connection I have submitted SD-57 by Bernhard Dilger, summary in the transcript of 23 July 1946; SD 58 by Dr. Ehlich in the same transcript; SD 59 by Karl Heinz Bent in the same transcript; SD 60 in the same transcript and I submit SD 21 by Oskar Eisele, summary of the contents in transcript of 9 July 1946. not possible. I submit SD 22 by Werner May, summary of contents in the transcript of 9 July 1946. Amt VI. I shall submit later, SD 61 by Walter Schellenberg; the summary of the contents is in transcript of 23 July 1946. Furthermore, SD 62 by Walter Schellenberg, summary of contents is in the same transcript. I submit furthermore on the tasks and activities of Amt VI-S, affidavit SD 66, by Otto Skorzeny. I submit this affidavit provisionally. The Commission did not decide whether Amt VII was charged.
The chairman of the Commission told me that the Tribunal would decide this question. It is SD 63 by Dr. Dietl, which I shall submit later. immigration offices had the purpose of carrying out evacuations with the aim of permanent colonization of the occupied territories, the destruction of their national existence, and thus constantly expanding the German border. (Trial Brief against the SS, III G, pages 33 and 35 of the German translation.) I have submitted in this connection SD 64 by Martin Sandberger, summary of the contents in the transcript of 23 July 1946. Prosecution in the examination of Dr. Hoffman. I was not able to submit this affidavit to the Commission because the Commission had already concluded its activity when I received the affidavit. Therefore I ask that I may be allowed to submit this affidavit under SD No. 65.
THE PRESIDENT: You have one 65 already, haven't you? It came through the translation.
DR. GAWLIK: That should be SD 71, your Lordship. From this affidavit I shall read the following, briefly: "First, to prove knowledge about the facts given, I, Georg Schrebel, was in Brunswick as Government Councillor in 1939, temporarily in the Reich Criminal Police Office in Berlin, and from 1941 to 1945 as Section Chief for Personnel Questions in Main Office Security Police of the Reich Ministry of the Interior. From January 1944 on, I was also in charge of the Personnel Department of the Secret State Police, Gestapo. My last rank was Regierungsdirektor and SS Standartenfuehrer." The statement: "At no time in the existence of the Gestapo and the SD were there instructions or decrees from the Chief of the Security Police and the SD, or the Reich Ministry of the Interior, according to which the activity of the Gestapo, at the head or at its agencies throughout the Reich, was to be influenced or supervised by the SD. The agencies of the Gestapo were at all times completely independent. The independence and the separate division of the State Police made general influencing by the SD impossible. Supervision would not have been permitted by the Office Chief of IV or the Chief of the Security Police because this would have interfered with the actual responsibility of the State Police."
I ask that I may be allowed to submit this affidavit when I have the translation.
Now I have a collective statement on 6,123 affidavits. I have not yet received the translations. I have only the French translations and I ask that I may be allowed to submit the French translations. I submit the list on these affidavits. From my collective statement I ask to be allowed to read subject 18 regarding participation of SD members in executions in the areas of commitment. I have 140 affidavits on this subject of the agencies of the SD from all parts of Germany for the time from 1939 to 1945, which state the following: "The agencies and members of the SD Amt III had no knowledge of the participation of SD members in executions in Einsatzkommandos in the East.
Now I come to the presentation of my documents. First, I would like to submit that my documents are also numbered according to the Trial Brief against the Gestapo and SD. The first document refers to the charge of conspiracy. Ribbentrop to establish a uniform German intelligence service. The document has already been submitted under USSR 120. I quote from this document the following: "The secret intelligence service has the task, so far as foreign countries are concerned, to gather for the Reich information in the political, military, economic and technical fields. The Fuehrer has ordered in addition that the secret intelligence service, so far as foreign countries are concerned, should be regulated in accord with the Reich Minister of Foreign Affairs." the SD. I shall not read this document but I will call the attention of the court to the fact that although Amt III and Amt VI were united with Amt IV and Amt V, Amt III and Amt VI had no police tasks. together. They are excerpts dealing with the Reich's Ministry of Justice; SD-3, the Reich Traffic Authority; SD-4, the Agency of the Reich Food Office; SD-5, the Reich Forestry; SD-6, Reich's Ministry for Armament and War Production; SD-7, the Reich's Ministry for Food and Agriculture; SD-8, the cooperation of these agencies with the security service. these documents. I furthermore submit these documents as evidence that these things were the task of the SD. They had to cooperate not only with the State Police, but with all agencies of the State.
The next document is SD-12. With this I want to prove that the SD, in the years around 1936 did not have the significance assigned to it by the Prosecution.
The next document is SD-13. It is an excerpt from the circular decree of the chief of the SIPO and the SD of the 16 of October, 1941. This document shows that the SS and police jurisdiction effected only the regular members of the SD, not the honorary members. The majority of the members of the SD were honorary and were not under the SS and Police jurisdiction.
The next document is SD-14. Fourteen is an excerpt from a decree of the Party Chancellery. "Only the Hoheitstraeger of the Movement from Kreisleiter up are entitled to issue political evaluations or certifications of political reliability." Statement of Evidence, III and IV. The same subject of evidence concerns the next document SD-15. It is an excerpt from the RSHA in the 1st of June, 1940. This decree shows that from the 1st of July, 1940, the information bureau of the Amt I, SD, will be transferred to Division IV C 1. That is for political information of all kinds. The Gestapo Amt became competent and the Gestapo had no support from the SD. Prosecution, but the SD was not at all the information service of the Party. Within its political organization, the Party had its own political report. And from the Kreisleiter on up, it had expert technical reports from all offices. task of this four-year plan. in the occupied territories was not voluntary, but was based on legal order. I quote from this document "Refusal of departmental personnel to undertake employment in occupied territories."
I also quote "For members of personnel in public service to has on principle been approved.
Since a limitation to the Reich of the special service order have been complied with, expecially territories too."
racially undesirable persons and to execute them; Trial brief ag In the case of Document SD 18.
It is an excerpt from Chief of the Security Police and the SD.
I call the attention of the Court to the file note, IV-A. This refers to the jurisdiction of the Gestapo.
The decree is furthermore addressed to all state Document SD-19 is the next document.
I should like to call the attention of the Court to the file note IV-A. I quote from this document.
"The regional and branch offices of the examinations which are still under way."
Document SD-20 is next. This document concerns the THE PRESIDENT : Dr. Gawlik, what is the meaning of SD-10, Paragraph 2? The writing refers especially to various figures and then "No. 9242 Top Secret, according to which the the General Government only."
Now do you select prisoners of war' What does that mean?
DR. GAWLIK : That is the charge which the Prosecution has made. I want to prive that this was done by the Gestapo alone. In this decree it is ordered thatnthese selections are to be carried out only in the Government General in the future. This is no t relevant in this connection, Your Lordship, I am only interested in Paragraph 3.
THE PRESIDENT : But it is a document of the SD, is it not? It is an administrative ruling, is it not?
DR. GAWLIK : Your Lordship, the Chief of the Security Police and the SD had 70 offices. For this reason it is important which of his offices acted. Office 4 was the secret Police, Gestapo. Office 3 was the domestic SD. Office 6 was the Foreign Service. Each of these offices had its own chief. Office 4 is another organization. Ever those offices was the Chief of the Security Police of the SD. This title does not show what the SD had to do with it. One must examine which of his offices did it, whether it was Office 4, 3 or 6. And where I have called your Lordship's attention to the file note, IV-A, that was office 4, the Secret State Police, Gestapo. This shows that Offices 3 and 6 had nothing to do with this matter, only Office 4. This is again shown by number three which refers expressly only to the state Police offices.
THE PRESIDENT : Very well, we will ajourn now.
(A recess was taken until 1400 hours.)
(The hearing reconvened at 1400 hours, August 20, 1946).
DR. GAWLIK: In answer to the last question of your Lordship, I think it would assist the Tribunal if I briefly indicated the direction of my evidence and what I propose to establish by means of that document. organizations. The Gestapo is indicted separately, the Criminal Police is not indicted and the SD is indicted as a unit of the SS. Above all of them stand the Chief of the Security Police and the SD and in that small way it can be compared with the petition of the defendant Goering, who was the Supreme Commander of the Airforces, Prussian Minister and President, Prime Minister a Hunting Master. Thus, from the addition of the Security Police and the SD you cannot draw the conclusion as to which was which and that becomes apparent from the reference and file numbers and the people who dealt with these files and I am trying to establish that by means of my document.
Russian prisoners of war. One paragraph deals with the very question which your Lordship addressed to me with reference to previous documents and I shall, therefore, read the document.
"In order to avoid any delay in the removal of newly incoming prisoners of war into the Reich, the selection of political commissars and directors by detachments of the Security Police will be carried out in the future in the General Government only. In the General Government the selection is further carried out by the Security Police. with the measure of the Security Police and not the SD.
It then goes on to say:
"In order to insure a more rapid execution, the Security Police will reinforce its detachments in the General Government."
I then pass on to document SD 21. In connection with this document, I beg to draw the Tribunal's attention to the file reference IV, that is to say we are concerned with measures of Department IV and Department IV was the Secret State Police, The Gestapo.
Had it been the SD then the file reference would have been III or VI.
THE PRESIDENT: In the document you have just been dealing with you have got 2A III E at the top, and you have III E a little bit further down.
DR. GAWLIK: Your Lordship, the higher one is the general collection of decrees of which there are several volumes which I got from the library here and it is with reference to this general collection of decrees that 2A IIIE refers to and then the file reference is IV A (1 c) 2468 A B/42 G.
THE PRESIDENT: Just by the first of April, 1942, there is III E. What does that mean -- OKW File No. 2F 24.73, prisoner of war organization E E?
DR. GAWLIK: I have not got that. Your Lordship, I have not got that here, I do not know at the moment.
THE PRESIDENT: Immediately under the words: "re: labor detachments for agricultural work."
DR. GAWLIK: May I beg to ask your Lordship, did you refer to SD 21? That is a military file reference, your Lordship. It says OKW Supreme Command of the armed forces, file reference of the armed forces chief of prisoner of war organization III E and that III E has nothing to do with Department III.
THE PRESIDENT: All right, go on.
DR. GAWLIK: I now come to document SD 22, as we are there concerned with extracts from the directives for the detachments of the chief of the Security Police to be assigned to the prisoner of war camps for enlisted men. The date is 17 July, 1941.
I beg to draw the Tribunal's attention in this connection to the fact that the chief of the Einsatzcommandos are ordered to get in touch with the chief of the nearest State Police office or the Commander of the Security Police and the SD. Security Police and SD; he too had several sub-departments. III was SD, IV was State Police, V was Criminal Police and so this type of commander does not say either with which departments we are concerned or which department worked on it.
which is contained in the following sentence.
"As a matter of principle, such communications must for information be communicated to the RSHA IV A 1." in Department IV that is the State Police, and that the Department III had nothing to do with it.
the allegation on the part of the prosecution, according to which the SD had carried out the decree "Kugel" Bullet. I refer to the trial brief against the Gestapo and SD statement of evidence 610, and I shall first of all deal with Document SD-23.
The document has already been presented by the prosecution; but it was given the number 1650-PS, being the teleprint letter from the Gestapo to the sub-department Aachen and to all leading state police departments. I quote, in order to prove that here, too, we are merely concerned with measures by the Secret State Police, the Gestapo.
"To this, I order the following: 1. The regional offices of the State Police are to take over the recaptured escaping PW officers from the Stalag Commanders and to transfer them to the Mauthausen concentration camp, according to procedure which is customary till nowunless circumstances make a special transport necessary.
"2. The OKW has been requested to instruct the PW camps that for the purpose of camouflage the recaptured persons should not be delivered directly to Mauthausen but to the competent local office of the State Police."
THE PRESIDENT: Why do you leave out the fact that those documents were addressed to Inspectors of the Sipo and the SD ?
DR. GAWLIK: Your Lordship, the case of the inspectors is the same as that of the chief of the security Police, in that it indicates the commanders The inspector was above the level of the Criminal Police, above the State Police , and above the SD. That is to say, he was exercising all three functions.
THE PRESIDENT: According to this he was an Inspector of the SD.
DR. GAWLIK: He was Inspector of the SD; but that would not allow the conclusion that he was also simultaneously inspector of the Security Police the Sipo, in the same person, that when carrying out that activity he was carrying out activities in the capacity of the inspector of the Sipo.
We are here concerned only with personal union but to counteract that prisoners of war were only to be taken there by the regional offices of the State Police that the SD Service Department had nothing to do with it. It says the regional offices of the State Police are to take over the recaptured prisoners As the inspectors of the Security Police had jurisdiction; they were above the regional Police Department and had control of these meausres of the State Police in his capacity of the Security Police. Also simultaneously he was inspector of the SD; but that does not mean that these things were to be carried out by the sub-departments of the SD.
I come to Document SD-24. It has already been presented under PS-1165and in this connection I beg to draw the attention of the Tribunal to the fact that this is signed by Mueller, who, as is known to the Tribunal, was the chief of Department IV. This again shows the sale responsibility of the Gestapo. lice of the SD, dated the 20th of October, 1942, which deals with the treatment of escaped Soviet Russian prisoners of war, and again I beg to draw the attention of the Tribunal to the file reference, which is IV.
I will now quote: "I request that the regional main offices of the State Police instruct all the police offices of the area, even if it has already been done, according to Article 3 of the decree of the High Command of the Armed Forces of the 5th of May, 1942. to the tasks of the SD Department then the SD Service Department would also have had to be formed.
THE PRESIDENT: Dr. Gawlik, I don't think it is doing any good at all to argue each document ever. You must make your final speech at some time; and unless there is anything really very important in a particular document which you want to draw our attention to so that we can really consider it before you make your final speech, you had much better leave the argument upon the documents until you get to your final speech. This is simply wasting your time without having any useful purpose at all.
DR. GAWLIK: Your Lordship, I only did --
THE PRESIDENT: Well, up to the present you have commented upon each document as far as I can see, SD-22, SD-23, SD-24, SD-25, each one of them; and you are going through the book like that. Why don't you offer them all in evidence in bulk; and then if you want to draw your attention to any particular docment for some particular purpose as I say, because you think it is important and we should consider it before you came to make your final speech, do so. But don't spend time in just explaining what each document is, We have to hear all the other organizations before we came to hear your speech.
DR. GAWLIK: Your Lordship, I only did it because I gathered from the question your Lordship put to me that there was some lack of clarity with reference to this point, namely, the position of the Chief of the Security Police of the SD and the commander and the inspectors.
THE PRESIDENT: I only put a question to you because you were going through each document in turn and I couldn't understand what the documents were about.
DR. GAWLIK: Documents 27 and 28 also deal with the allegation on the part of the prosecution regarding the decree "Kugel" Bullet. May I perhaps wuote from Document No. 28. "In as far as Soviet Russian prisoners of war are returned prisoners of war captured and brought back to the camp according to this order, they are in every case to be surrendered to the nearest office of the Gestapo." against the SD by the Prosecution, according to which they are to be held responsible for the institution and designation of concentration camps and for the transfer of political and racial undesirable persons into concentration and extermination camps for the purpose of forced labor and mass extermination. That is page 43 of the British trial brief. These documents show that the SD did not in any way participate in these measures; and, if I may, I should like to read one sentence of Document SD-29. "In the future, restrictions of personal liberty in accordance with Article 1, of the Decree for the protection of People and State of 28 February, 1933, may be ordered only by the Secret State Police Office with effect for the entire state,territory and by the governors of provinces and presidents of government districts, by the police president in Berlin and by the state police (Gestapo) branch offices for the local sphere of their authority."
From Document SD-31 I quote: "Protective custody can be used as a measure of the Secret State Police in order to combat any activities hostile to the state and the people. Only the Secret State Police is entitled to the decree of protective custody."
which the SD had also administered concentration camps. I shall, therefore, quote one sentence from the document.
"The camp commandant of concentration camps is in charge of any economic plan of the SS within its sphere of organization."
THE PRESIDENT: I can't see any point in drawing our attention to that document at the present time.
DR. GAWLIK: In the trial brief the accusation has been raised against the SD that they also had administered concentration camps.
THE PRESIDENT: But this document doesn't show that they did not.
DR. GAWLIK: Document SD-37 is a decree from the Chief Economic Department of the Administrative Main Office. That was a completely different department, which had nothing to do with the RSHA.
THE PRESIDENT: It seems to me to be quite vague as to who the camp commandants of concentration comps are. As I say, it doesn't seem to me to be a document which it is necessary to refer to at this stage.
DR. GAWLIK: I then refer to document number SD-39. There it says: "The transfer of the Inspectorate of the Concentration Camps into the Economic Administration Main Office has been carried out with the full agreement of all main offices concerned. " were under the jurisdiction of the Inspectorate of the Concentration Camps, and that they were then transferred to the SS Economic Administration Main Office. However, that was part of the RSHA. Inspectorate of Concentration Camps also becomes apparent from the previous document, SD-38. stated:
THE PRESIDENT: (Interposing): You are not taking the slightest notice of what I said to you. You are going through every document, or practically every document -- not every document.
You began this by saying that 29 to 42 dealt with concentration camps. Then you went to 37; then you went to 38; then you went to 39. They really don't help the Tribunal at all. You have told us that 29 to 42 referred to transfer to concentration camps. Well, that is quite enough. Unless there is a document which is really important, which we should study before we hear you make your speech, the summary that 29 to 42 deal with transfer to concentration camps is quite enough.
DR. GAWLIK: I had thought that I would be assisting the Tribunal by drawing their attention to the fact that concentration camps came under the SS Economic Chief Administrative Department and not the RSHA. Only for that reason did I discuss these further documents. pated in the deportation of citizens of the Eastern Territories for the purpose of forced labor, and that they and the task of supervising this forced labor.
I quote from these documents only the following. From document 43, under figure "2":
"The tasks arising from the employment of Soviet Russians are to be coordinated with the Section and the State Police, if proper, from the Regional Office,and are to be handled by a criminal police officer under his direct Chief of the State Police Regional Office."
I now quote from Appendix 1 to Document 43 one sentence: "The recruiting of labor from the former Soviet Russian territory is carried out by recruitment commissions from the Reich Ministry of Labor. The recruiting commissions of the Reich Labor Minister will create reception camps."
Document SD-50 deals with the Commando Order. I beg to draw the Tribunal's attention to the words "are to be handed over to the Security Police." part of the prosecution that the SD had the task of protecting civilians who had lynched fliers belonging to the Allied Nations.