to leave, since I wasn't even prepared to accept the position in the RSHA under those conditions which he had offered to me, which were that the heads of the executive departments would retain that position. He was very angry with me--so angry that he didn't shake me by the hand and expressed his displeasure in various other ways which I felt during the subsequent weeks. received a telegram ordering me to report to head-quarters, which since then had been transferred to East Prussia. I assumed that in accordance with the wishes I had expressed to him he would now give me a full task. I went to headquarters with the view that I had at last achieved what my brothers or my other male relatives had been doing. But I was wrong. He told me that he had talked to the Fuehrer and that he had considered the centralization of the intelligence service appropriate, that he was going to enter into negotiations with the armed forces, and that I would be given the task of organizing and extending the intelligence service. The state would continue by which I continue the executive powers. outside world, then I have to answer that it was never announced, so that formally the Prosecution are right when they are accusing me. As far as the outside world is concerned, I have never introduced those limits. To that I can only say that I can refer to the words of my then superior, and I thought I could rely on them. He stated to me in the presence of Nebe and Mueller that he had given those two the corresponding orders, which were that there should be immediate contact with him as there had been since Heydrich's death and that they were to report to him directly and received their orders from him directly. to Heydrich--such as, for instance, the task of solution of the Jewish problem--were not only not known to me at the time but they were never given to me at all. Nominally I was the chief of the RSHA, and as such I dealt with the immediate tasks, as I said before, of creating this new intelligence service; and those I regarded army tasks. But Himmler's contact with the state police and the criminal police continued as it was, and it wasn't until much later that I could find that it was often carried out in the name of the chief of the RSHA, that is to say, my name, without that I knew of these orders when they were issued or that I had even seen them.
orders from Himmler, but they did so in the manner that they used my name as chief of the RSHA and signed with it. I shall probably have to state in detail later on that they continued habits which originated from Heydrich' time, who had the entire executive powers in his hand and who deputized corresponding powers to Mueller and Nebe. But I never had those powers from the beginning, and therefore I couldn't have deputized any powers to anybody else. Perhaps I ought to add, on the question of my responsibility, by saying that possibly I never have taken the necessary care to insure that the situation was clarified and to show that there would be no order of the criminal police with my name on it. The fact that I did not concern myself with that sufficiently is Himmler's fault, but partly probably my fault too. IV, Ohlendorf, on January 3, 1946, made before this Tribunal. I am putting it to you briefly, and will you please make your statement.
This statement of Ohlendorf's refers to the question of the executive power, and Ohlendorf said, upon being asked a question: "If you put the question whether Kaltenbrunner could have caused executive functions to be carried out, then I must answer that with yes. But if, on the other hand, you refer to Mueller and Himmler, excluding Kaltenbrunner in this connection, then I must draw your attention to the fact that in accordance with the construction of the system of the RSHA Mueller was Kaltenbrunner's subordinate; and therefore orders from Himmler to Mueller would be orders to Kaltenbrunner also. So therefore it was Mueller's duty to keep Kaltenbrunner informed."
And then he goes on to say, "I can say that it is definitely known to me that one expression was often used, 'to the last washerwoman' Himmler would reserve himself a final decision personally, and that whether Kaltenbrunner had no powers in that connection I cannot say."
A This requires an explanation. He is right in as far as according to the organization of the RSHA nothing had changed since Heydrich's time. So that as far a as official channels were concerned he could certainly say "Himmler, Kaltenbrunner, Mueller." But during the conferences, and when Himmler gave orders, it was cleanly excluded. And to the remark regarding that Himmler reserved himself the decision as far as the last washerwoman, that proves that the condition which arose was that, contrary to the time of Heydrich, the medium between Himmler and Mueller was no longer active. That intermediary was I. So that in fact the immediate orders from Himmler went immediately to Mueller. Prosecution. I now submit to you a document and ask for your statement. It is the document L-38, USA Exhibit No. 517.
THE PRESIDENT: You mean 033-PS?
DR. KAUFMANN:L-38, USA 517. May I ask whether the Tribunal have that document?
THE PRESIDENT: It came through before as 038. You mean L-38, do you?
DR. KAUFMANN: Yes, L-38. I am calling it Kr-3. This is concerned with the accusation raised during-
THE PRESIDENT: Dr. Kaufmann, has this already got an exhibit number? You don't want to give it another exhibit number.
DR. KAUFMANN: Very well. If it isn't necessary then I won't BY DR. KAUFMANN: orders bore your name either in facsimile or in typewritten form; and question two is whether you have given such protective custody arrest orders, whether original orders therefore are available; and, lastly, wheter if this is not applicable you knew of them. Please, will you make a statement in connection with this document? I ever sign or oven see a single protective custody arrest order. During interrogations before the trial a number of protective custody arrest orders were put before me in connection with certain questions which were put to me.
Everyone of thos orders was signed with my name, either with typewritten letters or in teleprint letters, and I think in one case there was a facsimile signature.
Q You will admit that as such this statement of yours isn't very credible. It is an incredible story that such orders were signed with his name. How do you explain that? How do you explain that fact, a fact which can be proved on the strength of the documents which have your signature?
A I hadn't finished my statement. I had stated that this signature "Kaltenbrunner" in protective custody arrest orders could only have arisen in that way--that the chief of the department, Mueller, continued to do what he did under Heydrich, at which time he was allowed to do so, which was that the name of the chief of the RSHA was put on these orders and that he authorized his subordinates to do so. Quite obviously he continued to do so during my time, because otherwise those orders couldn't have been put before me here.
to do this. To the contrary, this was altogether impossible and also superfluous, because he was immediately under Himmler and he had Himmler's authority so that he might just as well have written "Himmler" or "By order of Himmler", or "By authority of Himmler". I admit that this remains as a fact before this Tribunal, which the Tribunal night not believe me or couldn't believe me, but this is the true state of affairs and Himmler never gave me a cause to definite my attitude in this connection, since he told me that I would not be given these executive tasks. used, that it was misused? all and that it was admissible and that has been carried out very often? Himmler and myself as early as 1942 but I think even before that, on two occasions -- I talked on one occasion to him and another occasion to Thierack. We had correspondence about this conception. I consider protective custody, as it was handled in the German Reich, only in the smallest number of cases, as being a necessity in the interests of the State, or to put it best or make more accurately, that I consider that only then can it be considered a measure justified by the war. Apart from that, my views were against this conception and against protective custody altogether and I often spoke against it, using legal arguments and turned against it. On several occasions, I have talked to Himmler and even Hitler about this. I spoke about a meeting of public prosecutors, I think, in 1944, and I publicly voiced my views which were against this. Since old times, it was my viewpoint that a man's liberty must be counted amongst his highest privileges and that only a proper court based on the constitution can pass judgment, which would deprive him of that liberty. protective custody arrests. As one of the reasons for protective custody, it is stated that the man was responsible for activities hostile to the State or the spreading of untrue rumors or as a result, refusal to work, religious propaganda Please, will you express your views on the reasons for those protective custody arrests.
Were these to be approved of?
A No. I consider those reasons for protective custody to be wrong and I think I had better explain in detail. At any rate, my attitude is due to the fact that all the perpetrations, which have been mentioned here, might just as well have been dealt with by a proper law court and might have been prosecuted by the state. For that reason, I consider protective custody as such, with those reasons, as being wrong. by saying that you want to say that you had no knowledge of protective custody arrest orders; that you had given no authority for them and that you haven't signed them, but since those arrest orders were issued within the setup of this department, you consider that you ought to have had knowledge of them. Is this a correct summary or is it incorrect? tion. The prosecution called you the intellectual perpetrator and said that you as the Chief of the Security Police and the SD were responsible for the murdering and illtreatment of civilian persons through the so-called Einsatzgruppen (Action Commandos). I am going to quote a few sentences from the statement made by the witness Ohlendorf here in this courtroom on January 7, 1946, and, of course, the statement made by Ohlendorf implicates you and therefore I am asking you to make your statement. Ohlendorf says with reference to the Einsatzgruppen (Action Commandos) that after you entered, you would have had to occupy yourself with that problem. "He, Kaltenbrunner," says Ohlendorf "would therefore know the documents," referring to these Einsatzgruppen, "because they came under one of his departments." He goes on to say with reference to the valuables taken away from the executed persons, that these had been sent to the Reich Ministry of Finance or to the RSHA, and he finally states that officers for these Action Commandos were recruited from amongst the leading officials of the State Police and only a small percentage were drawn from, out of the SD. What is your view on it, your statement on the question of whether you knew of the existence of these action groups and whether you knew of that significance?
unknown to me. I heard later that they had existed, but many months later. In this connection, I want to say the following. It is known to the Tribunal, from, Ohlendorf's statement and from decrees which have been discussed here, originating from Himmler and Hitler, that orders for the killing of people had been given. These action groups or action commandos, during the time that I was in office, were never formed. Those groups which had been active up to the same time that I came into office, were also formed before I took over the RSHA, or rather, they had been dissolved or had come under a new superior. I don't know whether the witness Ohlendorf has stated here just when ha returned from his Action Commandos.
A That is before I came into office. The action groups must later on have come under the jurisdiction of the Higher SS and Police Leaders in the occupied territories, and this is even more probable, they were under the jurisdiction of the chief of the anti-bandit units. I cannot answer your questiondifferently, since my possibilities of investigating the whole complex were not at my disposal.
I think you also asked me whether it is known to me that valuables, which had been taken away from executed persons, had been sent to the SD or the Ministry of Finance. I know nothing of such but I do know that Himmler had given a order to all police authorities, not only the security police but also other organizations in the occupied territories, be it the Order Police or be it the antibandit units,or be it those sections of the armed forces which were later on under his command, saying that all such property would have to be surrendered to the Ministry of Finance. result of an order originating from the RSHA? icance of these action groups. When, as far as the time is concerned, did you get that knowledge? may have been the following day when I reported to Himmler in November 1943.
Q 1943? and what they signified, then the question arises what your attitude about them was, and, if you should have been against them just what did you do to terminate their existence? Did you have a possibility to do something or not? of an action group. Their existence, or their previous activities, became known to me late in 1943. I knew that I would be against such a misuse of men under the RSHA and that I would have to defend myself against it. I think on the 13th of September, 1943, I called on Hitler, on the occasion of a visit of the just-liberated Mussolini. I saw him, but an attempt to talk to him failed, because of this state visit. my activities, and on that occasion I talked to the Fuehrer about the fact that the Einsatz Commandos had become known to me. However, it wasnot only about that. It was on that occasion that I approached him for the first time about the entire Jewish problem, and about the fact which had also just become clear to me, namely, that Himmler was giving orders directed against the Jews. through that problem in these details. However, I would like to supplement my statement now and say that action groups no longer came into the picture so far as I was concerned, because the entire personnel was transferred to the Anti-Partisan Units on the identical day when I joined the office in Berlin. I think I can remember distinctly that von dem Bach-Zelewski, who was the Chief of the Anti-Partisan Units, was appointed in January of 1943, and this may be the reason for the fact that I received no reports regarding the activities of these action groups. This is an extremely grave document, to which I want you to make a statement.
camp at Mauthausen.
A Is this photostat copy the same? American parachutists who were captured in 1945. whether you have issued this order, whether you were responsible for issuing such an order?
A Yes. We had discussed, you and I, the same document, yesterday, and therefore it is known to me. knowledge until this document was put before me, or until it was put before me by the interrogator here in Nurnberg.
Q Did you know Ziehreiss? an order for an execution, that is to say, to pass sentence of death, and sign it independently. Such an authority was only held, apart from Hitler, by Himmler. presented execution orders which had the signature of Mueller. Will you say something about that?
A If an execution order had Mueller's signature, then he could only have done so on the strength of an order from Himmler, or on the strength of a judgment passed by a proper court. Mueller had authority to issue execution orders, then you would have had to have authority to a much greater degree? power, nor was the organization under Himmler such that I could have had it. After Heydrich's death he retained these powers, and that was not changed when I came into office.
particularly since these are foreign parachutists, that one would, first of all, have to ascertain whether high offices in Berlin, including your RSHA, would have known about this. Did you receive no knowledge of the matter afterwards?
A I want to make a statement on that. The events as such most certainly did not come to my knowledge.
THE PRESIDENT: Have you finished with Document L-51?
DR. KAUFFMANN: No, I am still concerned with the document, but I am about to leave it.
THE PRESIDENT: Well, ought you not to refer him to the particular incident which is referred to towards the end of the document, where it says "Concerning the American military mission which landed behind the German front in the Slovakian or Hungarian area in January 1945"? It goes on, then, to say that the, I think it was, Adjutant of the Camp said "Now Kaltenbrunner has given the permission for the execution. This letter was secret and had the signature, 'signed, Kaltenbrunner'."
DR. KAUFFMANN: This is a short document, and I think he knows every single word of it, but I will put it to him again.
BY DR. KAUFMANN:
It says here:
"I estimate the number of those persons arrested to have been 12 or 15. They were wearing a uniform which was either American or Canadian, brown-green colors, and a red beret. Eight or ten days after their arrival, the order for their execution was received by means of a radio message, or a teleprint. Standartenfuehrer Ziehreiss came to see me and said, 'Now, Kaltenbrunner has approved of the execution. The letter was secret, and had the signature, signed, Kaltenbrunner.'
"These men were then shot and their valuables were given to me by Oberscharfuehrer Niedermeier."
Would you, very briefly, define your attitude? my knowledge, or that it could have taken place with my participation. This is not only a crime against the laws of warfare, this is particularly an action which would produce the most serious foreign political consequences. Mueller, or, even if I consider that I was his superior, that any of us could have acted in such a case. There must definitely have been a previous, detailed conference between Himmler and the Fuehrer. the legal department concerned must have been heard on the subject first, and in connection with such an event there would have have to be either a decision from the Fuehrer or an order from Himmler. However, all that is not known to me. on it, then this can only mean that this was an order which, as I have described before, had my name on it wrongly, since I never had authority to issue an order for an execution. Therefore, the signature should have been Himmler, or, by Himmler's order, Mueller.
Q So that you attribute this signature to a misuse?
A No. I believe that this is not my signature at all, but that it should have said "Himmler". It cannot be assumed that Mueller would have signed his or my name in such a matter.
Q We are now coming to another problem. I am referring now to document 1063-15, USA Exhibit 492, which is a letter from the RSHA, dated June 26, 1943. It has the signature, "Signed, Dr. Kaltenbrunner", and the letter is addressed to all Higher SS and Police Leaders. It refers to the construction of labor education camps.
Will you please look through the letter? The prosecution are accusing you of having established such camps. Please explain what the facts are in this connection, and please state whether that letter originated from you. The fact that my name has been affixed to this document with a typewriter proves to me that this order had not been shown to me before it went out. Otherwise, I would have signed it personally.
afterwards.
Q That is a labor education Comp? Are they identical with a concentration camp? Germans--had not served in the labor corps, had failed to serve in the labor corps, and who, in spite of repeated reminders, didn't do so; all foreign workers who had left their place of work without permission, and had been apprehended; and workers who were caudght during raids on railways stations, and roads, and who were, not in any permanent employment. be hold there for 14 to 56 days. as administration and orders were concerned, came under the state police departments and furthermore, were subordinate to the Commanders of the security police and SD. Did you have knowledge of that? violation of the compulsory labor service of the German citizen. It was a perpetration which could have been dealt with by the law courts just as well, but because of the enormous number of workers employed in the Reich who were not only G ermans, but amounted to 15,000,000 or 20,000,000, of which 8,000,00 foreigners had to be added, it would have been impossible to deal with hundreds of thousands of cases of failure to work or breach of contract, or wrongful leaving of their place of work. and of course, police departments would not have sufficient prison accomodations which would have sufficed to accomodate all those cases and to punish then with short terms. On the strength of these arguments, such a labor education camp was established. camps?
A Yes, principally I approved of them. Although I didn't partake in this particular order her, I had, nevertheless, knowledge of it later and on the strenth of the conditions existing in the Reich I considered it necessary and proper.
for what legth of time they were sent to these camps? What their ration were, how they were employed? poses of detaining people for a period of not exceeding 56 days. I think that that was only possible after the man had previously been sentenced for 3 similar offenses. Transfer to labor education camp....
THE PRESIDENT: Your question was whether you knew the condition in the camps? You are not answering it at all.
DR. KAUFMANN: Will you please immediately answer my question?
THE WITNESS: I think you asked me...
DR. KAUFMANN: I asked you whether you knew anything regarding the rations, treatment, employment of the detainees in these camps? for the public employment of labor. That is, for public utilities, railroad maintenancem and damage due to air attacks, and in order to do that work detainees from labor education camps were used.
They have been seen by the entire population so that the impression which these prisoners made ....
THE PRESIDENT: It still is not answering the question.
DR. KAUFFMANN: I put three exact questions to you. I want three exact answers. Do you know anything about the treatment, the rations, and the employment of these detainees from these camps? Did you have any knowledge of it or not?
A I have referred to their employment. Yes, I had. The other two factors I did not know from my own observations;
Q Did officers of Department IV ever report to you on this? the interior political information service, and I have discussed this problem and the employment of such workers for emergency work.
Q Did you see any cause to interfere? camps and detainees used didn't become known to me. This is a statement, an affidavit from Lindo. Soviet Russian political commissioners and Jewish soldiers were taken out of prisoner-of-war camps and taken away to be shot. For this purpose they were transferred to a concentration camp. Furthermore, he states that the Chief of Department IV, Mueller, had given the execution order for this purpose and signed it. document. What, Defendant, is your statement with reference to this document?
A This order of Himmler's was not known to me and may I point out that during 1941 up to 1943 this order was used, which means, in the main, during the time when I was not in Berlin.
Q I am now reading a very implicating passage. Paragraph 4. Will you please make a statement regarding the question whether this report on these facts referred to the time after 1943 or the time before that, or whatever you may be able to say about that?
Q "In the prisoner of war camps at the Eastern Front, there were former action groups which were commanded by members of the secret state police. These groups were attached to the camp commandant and they had the task of dealing with prisoners-of-war who came under the orders which had been issued, and which were to be executed, as they had been sought out and reported to RSHA."
In Paragraph 2, I am quoting the last paragraph:
"Those prisoners-of-war were formerly, first of all, discharged and then taken to a concentration camp for their execution. Now I am asking you what knowledge did you have of these proceedings?
A I had no knowledge of these facts. And what's more, it is impossible that I could have had knowledge of them. Orders which were issued in 1941 and which, as this witness says, continued to be in force until 1943, it is impossible that I could have had those orders in time to stop them even during the last days. RSHA, there was a department for an organization which was under the secret state police and that this department, beginning in 1941, until the middle of 1943, did exist and that it did issue and carry out such orders? It appears possible to assume that you too must have known something about these written documents and humanly impossible acts prohibited by International Law, and that you were informed of them? responsibility of the witness in that connection.
THE PRESIDENT: We will adjourn now.
(The Tribunal adjourned until 1400 hours) (The Defendant Kaltenbrunner resumed the witness-stand.)
MR. DODD: Dr. Kauffmann has told me that he has an opportunity to read two cross-interrogatories, which we wish to submit -- the cross-interrogatories of Dr. Mildner and Dr. Hoettl. I told Dr. Kauffmann that it might be well, in order not to disquiet the Defendant Kaltenbrunner, if they were read before he completed his examination.
THE PRESIDENT: Do you agree that it would be better that this crossexamination should be read now, so that the Defendant can deal with any points he wishes on it?
DR. KAUFFMANN: Yes, that will be satisfactory.
COLONEL AMEN: The first affidavit, if it please the Tribunal is the affidavit of Dr. Rudolf Mildner:
"I, the undersigned Dr. Rudolf Mildner, made the following affidavit in answer to cross-interrgations by representatives of the Office of United States Chief of Counsel relating to my affidavit of 29 March 1946, made in response to questions by Dr. Kauffmann for presentation to the International Military Tribunal:
"Question No. 1: Confirm or correct the following biographical data:
"Answer: December 1939, I became Chief of the Gestapo Office in Chemnitz.
"In March, 1941, I became Chief of the Gestapo Office in Kattowitz.
"In September, 1943, I became Commander of the SIPO and SD in Copenhagen "In January, 1944, I became Inspector of the SIPO and SD in Kassel.
"On 13 March 1944, I was made deputy chief of Groups IV A and IV B of the RSHA.
"In December, 1944, I became Commander of the SIPO in Vienna.
"In December, 1944, I became Deputy Inspector of the SIPO in Vienna.
"All of these appointments after January, 1943, were made by Kaltenbrunner as Chief of the Security Police and SD.
"Question No. 2: Is it not true that while you were Gestapo leader at Kattowitz you frequently sent prisoners to Auschwitz for imprisonment or execution; that you had contacts with the Political Department (Abteilung) at Auschwitz with regard to inmates sent from the district of Kattowitz; that you visited Auschwitz on several occasions; that the Gestapo 'SS Standgericht' frequently met within Auschwitz and you sometimes attended the trial of prisoners; that in 1942 and again in 1943, pursuant to orders by Gruppenfuehrer Mueller, Chief of Gestapo, the Commandant of Auschwitz showed you the extermination plants; that you were acquainted with the extermination plants at Auschwitz since you had to send Jews from your territory to Auschwitz for execution.
"Answer: Yes, these are true statements of fact.
"Question No. 3: With respect to your answer to Question No. 5 in your affidavit of 29 March 1946, did all orders for arrest, commitment to, punishment and individual executions in concentration camps come from RSHA? Was the regular channel for orders of individual executions from Himmler through Kaltenbrunner to Mueller, then to the concentration camp commandant. Did WVHA have supervision of all concentration carps for administration, utilization of labor, and maintenance of discipline?
"Answer: The answer is yes to each of the three questions.
"Question No. 3-a: Is it true that conferences took place between SS Obergruppenfuehrer Kaltenbrunner and SS Obergruppenfuehrer Pohl, Chief of the WVHA and Chief of Concentration Camps? Was Dr. Kaltenbrunner acquainted with conditions in concentration camps?
"Answer: Yes, and because of those conferences and on the occasion of discussions with the two Amt Chiefs, Gruppenfuehrer Mueller, IV, and Gruppenfuehrer Nebe, RSHA, the Chief of SIPO and SD, SS Obergruppenfuehrer Dr. Kaltenbrunner should be acquainted with conditions in concentration camps.
"I learned from SS Gruppenfuehrer Mueller, Chief of Amt IV, that regular conferences took place between RSHA and Amt Group D of WVHA.