The Nuremberg Tribunal v. The Tokyo Tribunal: Designs, Staffs, and Operations
Zachary D. Kaufman
Yale University - Law School; Harvard University - Harvard Kennedy School (HKS)
John Marshall Law Review, Vol. 43, No. 3, pp. 753-768, 2010
This article is published by invitation in a special symposium issue of the John Marshall Law Review entitled “International Law in the 21st Century: The Law and Politics of the International Criminal Court.” The article compares the International Military Tribunal (also known as the Nuremberg Tribunal) with the International Military Tribunal for the Far East (also known as the Tokyo Tribunal), the two ad hoc international war crimes tribunals the Allies established after World War II to prosecute suspected atrocity perpetrators from Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan, respectively. The article examines these two tribunals’ similarities and differences, especially as they relate to the tribunals’ designs, staffs, and operations. The article concludes by suggesting that future research should consider whether and, if so, how similarities and differences between the Nuremberg and Tokyo tribunals affected their results, including their durations and judgments.
Number of Pages in PDF File: 16
Keywords: Transitional Justice, War Crimes Tribunals, Nuremberg Tribunal, Tokyo Tribunal, ICTY, ICTR, International Criminal Court, SCSL, ECCC, Atrocities, Genocide, War Crimes, World War II, Holocaust, Japan, Germany, United States, U.S. Foreign Policy, United Nations Security Council, International Law
Date posted: August 27, 2011 ; Last revised: September 12, 2011