Advertisement

The Historian’s Trial: John Demjanjuk and the Prosecution of Atrocity

  • Lawrence Douglas
Chapter

Abstract

This chapter argues that atrocity trials have revolutionized the relationship between jurists and historians. With the criminal proceedings against John (Ivan) Demjanjuk as my focus, I argue that in cases involving mass atrocity, basic legal questions are unanswerable without the insights of professional historians. Although some historians worry about what happens to history when enlisted in the service of the state, Demjanjuk’s historic Munich trial showed how prosecutors called upon historians as expert witnesses to offer a highly granular historical understanding of a complex exterminatory practice. This trial by history crucially clarified the role of the collaborator in Nazi genocide. Ultimately, this chapter argues that it is impossible to cabin history from law in trials of mass atrocity. Second, it insists that the state is capable of deploying history in a sophisticated fashion to frame a satisfactory juridical understanding of such crimes.

References

  1. Anklageschrift in der Strafsache gegen Oskar Gröning, LG Lüneburg. 27 Ks 9/14, 1191 Js 98402/13. On file with author.Google Scholar
  2. Arendt, H. (1963) Eichmann in Jerusalem. A Report on the Banality of Evil (New York: The Viking Press).Google Scholar
  3. Arendt, H. (1992) Hannah Arendt/Karl Jaspers Correspondence, 1926–1969 (New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich).Google Scholar
  4. Benz, A. (2011) Der Henkersknecht. Der Prozess gegen John (Iwan) Demjanuk in München (Berlin: Metropol-Verlag).Google Scholar
  5. Black, P. (2011) ‘Foot Soldiers of the Final Solution. The Trawniki Training Camp and Operation Reinhard’, Holocaust and Genocide Studies 25(1), 1–99.Google Scholar
  6. Bönisch, G. et al. (2009) ‘Ein ganz gewöhnlicher Handlanger’, Der Spiegel, June 22.Google Scholar
  7. Browning, Ch. (1998) Ordinary Men. Reserve Police Battalion 101 and the Final Solution in Poland (New York: Harper).Google Scholar
  8. ‘Ehemaliger Richter sagt im Verfahren gegen Demjanjuk aus’ T-Online, April 21, 2010. http://www.t-online.de/regionales/id_41366780/ehemaliger-richter-sagt-im-verfahren-gegen-demjanjuk-aus.html.
  9. De Mildt, D. (1996) In the Name of the People. Perpetrators of Genocide in the Reflection of Their Post-War Prosecution in West Germany: The “Euthanasia” and “Aktion Reinhard” Trial Cases (Leiden: Springer).Google Scholar
  10. Douglas, L. (2001) The Memory of Judgment. Making Law and History in the Trials of the Holocaust (New Haven: Yale University Press).Google Scholar
  11. Douglas, L. (2016) The Right Wrong Man. John Demjanjuk and the Last Great Nazi War Crimes Trial (Princeton: Princeton University Press).Google Scholar
  12. Freudiger, K. (2002) Die juristische Aufarbeitung von NS-Verbrechen (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck).Google Scholar
  13. Friedlander, H. (2008) Nazi Crimes and the Law (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).Google Scholar
  14. ‘Für Völkermord gibts es keine Verjährung’, Der Spiegel, October 3, 1965. http://www.spiegel.de/spiegel/print/d-25803766.html.
  15. Golsan, R. (ed.) (2000) The Papon Affair. Memory and Justice on Trial (London: Routledge).Google Scholar
  16. Grabitz, H. (1985) NS-Prozesse. Psychogramme der Beteiligten (Heidelberg: C.F. Müller).Google Scholar
  17. Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952, Pub. L. No. 414 §340(a), 66 Stat. 163, 260 (1952) (codified as amended at 8 USC §1451(a) (1982).Google Scholar
  18. Jäger, H. (1982) Verbrechen unter totalitärer Herrschaft. Studien zur nationalsozialistischen Gewaltkriminalität (Frankfurt: Suhrkamp).Google Scholar
  19. Justiz und NS-Verbrechen Lfd.Nr.641 und 642, LG Hagen vom 20.12.1966, 11 Ks 1/64; BGH vom 25.03.1971, 4 StR 47–48/69.Google Scholar
  20. Lemkin, R. (1944) Axis Rule in Occupied Europe. Laws of Occupation, Analysis of Government, Proposals for Redress (Washington: Carnegie Endowment for International Peace).Google Scholar
  21. LG München II, Urteil von 12.5.2011, Az.: 1 Ks 115 Js 12496/08, p. 28 ff.Google Scholar
  22. Lichtblau, E. (2014) ‘Philadephia Man Accused in Nazi Case Dies’, The New York Times, July 23. http://nyti.ms/1sUx0to.
  23. Marrrus, M. (2002) ‘History and Holocaust in the Courtroom’, Yad Vashem Studies, 5, 215–239.Google Scholar
  24. Rousso, H. (2002) The Haunting Past. History, Memory and Justice in Contemporary France (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press).Google Scholar
  25. Rückerl, A. (1982) NS-Verbrechen Vor Gericht. Versuch einer Vergangenheitsbewältigung (Heidelberg: C.F. Müller Juristischer Verlag).Google Scholar
  26. Schabas, W.A. (2000) Genocide in International Law (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).Google Scholar
  27. Snyder, T. (2010) Bloodlands. Europe between Hitler and Stalin (New York: Basic Books).Google Scholar
  28. Teicholz, T. (1990) The Trial of Ivan the Terrible. State of Israel vs. John Demjanjuk (New York: St. Martin’s Press).Google Scholar
  29. The Trial of Adolf Eichmann: Record of the Proceedings in the District Court of Jerusalem [TAE]. Jerusalem: Trust for the Publication of the Proceedings of the Eichmann Trial, 1992, vol. I.Google Scholar
  30. Trial of the Major War Criminals before the International Military Tribunal, Nuremberg, 14 November 1945–1October 1946 (Nuremberg, Germany), vol. II.Google Scholar
  31. Vogel, R. (ed.) (1969) Ein Weg aus der Vergangenheit. Eine Dokumentation zur Verjährungsfrage und zu den NS-Prozessen (Frankfurt: Ullstein).Google Scholar
  32. Werle, G. (1995) Auschwitz Vor Gericht. Völkermord und bundesdeutsche Strafjustiz (Munich: C.H. Beck).Google Scholar
  33. Wiegrefe, K. (2014) ‘The Auschwitz Files. Why The Last SS Guards Will Go Unpunished’, Der Spiegel, August 28. http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/the-german-judiciary-failed-approach-to-auschwitz-and-holocaust-a-988082.html.

Recommended Readings

  1. Arendt, H. (1994) Eichmann in Jerusalem. A Reporto n the Banality of Evil (New York: Penguin Books).Google Scholar
  2. Bioxham, D. (2001) Genocide on Trial. War Crimes Trials and the Formation of Holocaust History and Memory (New York: Oxford University Press).Google Scholar
  3. Cesarani, D. (2007) Becoming Eichmann. Rethinking the Life, Crimes and trial of a “Desk Murderer” (Cambridge: De Capo Press).Google Scholar
  4. Douglas, L. (2001) The Memory of Judgment: Making Law and History in the Trials of the Holocaust (New Haven: Yale University Press).Google Scholar
  5. Finkielkraut, A. (1992) Remembering in Vain. The Klaus Barbie Trial & Crimes Against Humanity (New York: Columbia University Press).Google Scholar
  6. Golsan, R. J. (1996) Memory, the Holocaust, and French Justice. The Bousquet and Touvier Affairs (Hanover: University Press of New England).Google Scholar
  7. Golsan, R.J. and Misemer, S.M. (2017) The Trial That Never Ends: Hannah Arendt’s Eichmann in Jerusalem in Retrospect (Buffalo: University of Toronto Press).Google Scholar
  8. Osiel, M.J. (2001) Mass Atrocity, Ordinary Evil and Hannah Arendt. Criminal Consciousness in Argentina’s Dirty War (New Haven: Yale University Press).Google Scholar
  9. Priemel, K.C. and Stiller, A. (eds.) (2014b) Reassessing the Nuremberg Military Tribunals. Transitional Justice, Trial Narratives, and Historiography (New York: Berghahn Books).Google Scholar
  10. Wieviorka, A. (2006) The Era of the Witness (New York: Cornell University Press).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Lawrence Douglas
    • 1
  1. 1.Amherst CollegeAmherstUSA

Personalised recommendations