Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The Argument for Criminal Liability

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Judges Against Justice

  • 1586 Accesses

Abstract

Under international human rights law, states have an obligation to prosecute perpetrators of serious human rights violations. It has since long been shown that also judges can be responsible under international law for atrocities committed as part of the application and enforcement of municipal law. This was first established by the US Military Tribunal against leaders of the Nazi legal system and has since been confirmed by the European Court of Human Rights. Under municipal law, however, the picture is more complex. The legislation on judicial responsibility for unlawful judging varies from country to country, as do definitions of “unlawful” in relation to judicial activity.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
eBook
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    See Pereira (2005), location 2263.

  2. 2.

    See Pereira (2005), location 2245.

  3. 3.

    See Pereira (2005), location 2317.

  4. 4.

    See Nøkleby (1996), pp. 177–178.

  5. 5.

    It was presented by Radbruch (1948), pp. 57/58–63/64 and by Bader (1948), pp. 40–43. Fifty years later, the judgment and its reception were presented by Perels (1997).

  6. 6.

    Notable are Lippman (1997–1998), Wilke (2009), and Fraser (2012). It also was presented and commented by Sands (2008).

  7. 7.

    The Justice Case (1951), p. 1025.

  8. 8.

    Shaman (1990), p. 4.

  9. 9.

    Compare Greene (1995), pp. 1122–1129.

  10. 10.

    For this parallel, see Friedrich (1983), p. 13. The numbers of death sentences reported in the literature vary, and many report much higher figures. I have chosen to follow the accounting in the latest thesis on the subject of the German trials of Nazi criminals, Freudiger (2002), pp. 295–297.

  11. 11.

    See Werke (2001), pp. 3001–3008.

  12. 12.

    See Weinke (2011), p. 76.

  13. 13.

    In this, I disregard the trials that were conducted in the communist countries after the war since they were conducted for other reasons than to uphold the rule of law.

  14. 14.

    See Freudiger (2002), pp. 294–297.

  15. 15.

    The Justice Case (1951), p. 1086.

  16. 16.

    The Justice Case (1951), pp. 1155–1156.

References

  • Bader KS (1948) Das Urteil im Nürnberger Juristenprozeß. Deutsche Rechts-Zeitschrift 40–43

    Google Scholar 

  • Fraser D (2012) Evil law, evil lawyers? From the justice case to the torture memos. Jurisprudence 3(2):391–428

    Google Scholar 

  • Freudiger K (2002) Die juristische Aufarbeitung von NS-Verbrechen. Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen

    Google Scholar 

  • Friedrich J (1983) Freispruch für die Nazi Justiz Die Urteile gegen NS-Richter seit 1948 Eine Dokumentation. Rowolt Taschenbuchverlag, Hamburg

    Google Scholar 

  • Greene NL (1995) A perspective on “Nazis in the Courtroom”. Brooklyn Law Rev 61:1122–1129

    Google Scholar 

  • Lippman M (1997–1998) The prosecution of Josef Altstoetter et al.: law, lawyers and justice in the Third Reich. Dickinson J Int Law 16:343–433

    Google Scholar 

  • Nøkleby B (1996) Skutt blir den … Tysk bruk av dødsstraff i Norge 1940–1945. Gyldendal Norsk Forlag, Oslo

    Google Scholar 

  • Pereira AW (2005) Political (in)justice authoritarianism and the rule of law in Brazil, Chile and Argentina. University of Pittsburgh Press, Pittsburgh (Kindle edition)

    Google Scholar 

  • Perels J (1997) Der Nürnberger Juristenprozess im Kontext der Nachkriegsgeschichte, Vortrag gehalten am 4.12.1997 in der Johann-Wolfgang-Goethe Universität Frankfurt/Main

    Google Scholar 

  • Radbruch G (1948) Des Reichministeriums Ruhm und Ende, Zum Nürnberger Juristenurteil. Süddeutsche Juristenzeitung col. 64

    Google Scholar 

  • Sands P (2008) Torture team deception, cruelty and the compromise of law. Penguin, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Shaman JM (1990) Judicial immunity from civil and criminal liability. San Diego Law Rev 27(12):4

    Google Scholar 

  • Trials of War Criminals before the Nuremberg Military Tribunals, vol III, the Justice Case, Washington, 1951

    Google Scholar 

  • Weinke A (2011) Ehemalige Wehrmachtrichter in der SBZ/DDR Elitenaustausch und verhinderte Aufarbeitung. In: Perels J, og Wette W (Hg.) Mit Reinem Gewissen Wehrmachtsrichter in der Bundesrepublik und ihre Opfer. Aufbau Verlag, Berlin

    Google Scholar 

  • Werke G (2001) Rückwirkungsverbot und Staatskriminalität. Neue Juristische Wochenschrift 3001–3008

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilke C (2009) Reconsecrating the temple of justice: invocations of civilization and humanity in the Nuremberg Justice Case. Can J Law Soc 24:181–201

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty of Law, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway

    Hans Petter Graver

Authors
  1. Hans Petter Graver
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2015 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Graver, H.P. (2015). The Argument for Criminal Liability. In: Judges Against Justice. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-44293-7_6

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation