Export Mendeley
＜departmental bulletin paper＞
The Yamashita Trial and Command Responsibility (2): In Relation to Directive-11.12
| Creator | |
|---|---|
| Language | |
| Publisher | |
| Date | |
| Source Title | |
| Vol | |
| First Page | |
| Last Page | |
| Publication Type | |
| Access Rights | |
| JaLC DOI | |
| Abstract | The trial of Gen. Tomoyuki YAMASHITA, the commander of the Imperial Japanese Army in the 14th Area, is a well known case relating to charges of "command responsibility," specifically , the responsibil...ity of commander in relation to the war crimes committed by one 's subordinates . In the trial, it was admitted in principle that omissions of the breach of supervisory obligation were accompanied by criminal responsibi lity; however, the criteria for the presumption of knowledge, namely, that the accused "either knew or had the means of knowing" of the widespread cruelties committed by the Japanese forces, remained unclear. In the background of this matter were two factors. One was the directive [Directive-11.12 ] issue d by the senior organization [Gen. MacArthur] which expressed a desire to complete the proceedings at the earliest practicable date. The other was YAMASHITA's own attempts to protect himself during the trial. The stubborn attitude of YAMASHITA, who didn't attempt to acknowledge responsibi lity during the summoning of sworn witness conducted over four days, compelle d the committee which had already accepted to spee d-up trial proceedings under the directive [Directive-11.12], to consider to speed-up the trial even further. As a reaction to this , issues regarding time-consumption as well as fundamental problems such as the criteria for the presumption of knowledge became obscured. Such a management technique concerning the trial of war criminals was seen not only in the trials done in Manila after the YAMASHITA CASE but also in the tria ls in Yokohama under a different authoritative convener. It is certain that , in the trial under the jurisdiction of the U.S. Army forces , a comprehensive policy to judge the BC class war criminals existed , and that it became the origin of various controversies including the legal principles of command responsibility .show more |
| Table of Contents | はじめに 1. 山下証言の意義 2. 山下証言にみる責任の所在 (1) 上級組織（上級者）の責任 (2) 隷下組織（下級者）の責任（以上、前号） 3. 山下証言と審理迅速化問題（以下、本号） (1) 西春証言とリールの嘘 (2) ゲリラ容疑者の裁判とその取扱い おわりに |
Hide fulltext details.
| File | FileType | Size | Views | Description |
|---|---|---|---|---|
029_p031
|
5.13 MB | 416 |
Details
| NCID | |
|---|---|
| Record ID | |
| Subject Terms | |
| Type | |
| Created Date | 2021.10.14 |
| Modified Date | 2021.12.13 |