After World War II, the Allies set up tribunals in Germany and Japan to try German and Japanese fascist war criminals. The trial of German fascists began in 1945 and ended in 1946; the trial of Japanese war criminals began in 1946 and ended in 1948.
Before the tribunal was established, the Soviet Union had expressed opinions on the trial method, believing that the captured war criminals were all guilty anyway and should be shot or hanged. Why spend more time and money on them? The Western Allies believe that they are now just captured defendants. As for whether they are war criminals and to what extent they are war criminals, they have yet to be tried. During the trial, the defendants should not only have sufficient opportunities to defend themselves, but they should also be allowed to hire prosecutors. Attorney of your choice, fees paid by the court. At the time, the Soviet Union was in an absolute minority among the four Allied Powers, so Moscow's idea of ??a speedy trial was ruled out from the start.
After Germany surrendered, 3.5 million former Nazis were accused of various crimes. After preliminary trials around the world, only 9,600 people were finally put into court, of which only about 20 were at the top level. War criminals, such as former Nazi Air Force Commander G?ring. The International Court of Justice is located in the Judicial Building in Nuremberg. The trial of Japanese war criminals at the International Military Tribunal for the Far East was conducted in two courts. The Yokohama Military Tribunal tried Class B and C war criminals, and the Tokyo Military Tribunal tried Class A war criminals. The court formally prosecuted 28 Class-A war criminals, including Tojo Hideki, for crimes against peace, violations of the rules of war, crimes against humanity and conspiracy to commit suicide.
The defenders of German Nazi defendants came from the United States, Britain and even Germany, and all Japanese defendants were represented by American defense attorneys as well as Japanese defense attorneys.
Out of professional instinct, the defense lawyers for German war criminals insisted on not letting up on Qingshan and tried every means to absolve the defendants of their guilt. The interrogator is always able to present personal and material evidence in a timely manner to refute the sophistry of the defendant and lawyers. As a prosecutor, the prosecutor tried his best to list the evidence of the crime, and the defendant and his lawyer (the defendant's family provided favorable information behind the scenes) also tried their best to argue the case. However, the prosecutor immediately rebutted with more and more powerful evidence, and the war reignited. Whether the defendant is ultimately convicted depends on the fight that occurs during the trial. As a result of the Nuremberg Trials, of the 22 main defendants, 12 were sentenced to death, 2 to life imprisonment, 2 to 20 years in prison, and 1 to 15 years in prison. Two others were acquitted. The process of trying war criminals is also a process of more thoroughly exposing war crimes. The Nuremberg Trials were headline news in the West at the time. Every day readers could learn more about the cruel facts about the inner workings of the concentration camps from the "Condemnation - Hypocrisy - Anti-Hypocrisy" court proceedings published in newspapers. This not only educates the public, but is also responsible for history, because the trial is not only for contemporary people, but also can withstand the test of time. At that time, the Nuremberg Tribunal rented two villas on the outskirts of the city for the families of the victims and those who could provide circumstantial evidence of Nazi crimes. It was painful to attend that trial. Every day I heard revelations about the Nazi genocide atrocities, and how the secret service leader Himmler sent more than 300,000 Warsaw Jews to concentration camps in batches.