Opening Statement Before the International Military Tribunal Robert Jackson - Civilization can’t tolerate ignoring the terrible crimes committed from WWII because civilization can’t survive the repetition of the crimes - That the winning countries submit their POWs to trial is significant tribute paid by Powerto Reason - Use of international law to meet aggressive war - Fate of Nazi leaders as individuals is of little consequence to the world - The Nazi prisoners symbolize sinister evil, and civilization can afford no compromise withsocial forces which would gain renewed strength if the matter was dealt with indecisively - Issue of lack of neutrality o The prosecution and judges are (must be) the victors of the war  They must seek justice, not just vengeance - It’s false to think that to bring the prisoners to trial is unjust - The Defendants aren’t at trial for normal human things they may have done but for theirinhuman actions - Attack on the peace of the world is the crime against international society which brings into international cognizance crimes in its aid and preparation - Emphasis will only be on crimes generated by a central plan o Those who are the brains of the evil operations - The Tribunal has responsibility to apply sanctions of law to those found guilty of crime - Forces of law and order must be made equal to the task of dealing with international lawlessness of Nazis - Hope that there will be a basis for an ordered international leadership - Personal punishment won’t be effective deterrent against those who think they can win war o The ultimate step in avoiding constant wars is to make statesmen responsible to law  Law must condemn aggression by ANY country - This trial represents mankind’s efforts to apply law to statesmen who have attacked world peace - Above the personalities involved in the trial are impersonal forces o The prisoners represent evil and the prosecution represents civilization - Civilization asks that the juridical action puts the forces of international law on the side of peaceUniversal Declaration of Human Rights - We are all born free & equal. o We are all born free.  We all have our own thoughts and ideas. - We should all be treated in the same way. - Don’t Discriminateo These rights belong to everybody, whatever our differences. - The Right to Life. o We all have the right to life, and to live in freedom and safety - No Slavery o Nobody has any right to make us a slave.  We cannot make anyone our slave- No Torture o Nobody has any right to hurt us or to torture us - You have rights no matter where you go o I am a person just like you - We’re all equal before the law o The law is the same for everyone.  It must treat us all fairly - Your Human rights are protected by law o We can all ask for the law to help us when we are not treated fairly. - No unfair detainment. o Nobody has the right to put us in prison without good reason and keep us there, or to send us away from our country - The right to trial o If we are put on trial this should be in public  The people who try us should not let anyone tell them what to do - We’re always innocent till proven guilty o Nobody should be blamed for doing something until it is proven.  When people say we did a bad thing we have the right to do show it is nottrue - The right to privacy o Nobody should try to harm our good name  Nobody has the right to come into our home, open our letters, or bother us or our family without a good reason - Freedom to move o We all have the right to go where we want in our own country and to travel as wewish. - The right to seek a safe place to live o If we are frightened of being badly treated in our own country, we all have the right to run away to another country to be safe- Right to a Nationality o We all have the right to belong to a country.Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman, or Degrading, Treatment or Punishment The Torture Convention - The Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (the “Torture Convention” was adopted by the General Assembly of the UN on December 10, 1984. o The Convention entered into force on June 26th, 1987 after it had been ratified by20 States.- The Torture Convention was the result of many years’ work, initiated soon after the adoption of the Declaration on the Protection of All Persons from Being Subjected to Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman, or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (the “Torture Declaration”) by the General Assembly on December 9th, 1975. - In fact, the Torture Declaration was intended to be the starting point for further work against torture. o In a second resolution, also adopted on December 9th, 1975, the General Assembly requested the Commission on Human Rights to study the question of torture and any necessary steps for ensuring the effective observance of the Torture Declaration.  Two years later, on December 8th, 1977, the General Assembly specifically requested the Commission on Human Rights to draw up a draft convention against torture and other cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment, in the light of the principles embodied in the Torture Declaration. - The Commission on Human Rights began its work on this subject as its session in February-March 1978. o A working group was set up to deal with this item, and the main basis for the discussions in the working group was a draft convention presented by Sweden.  During each of the subsequent years until 1984 a similar working group was set up to continue the work on the draft convention. - There were a number of issues on which it was initially difficult to reach agreement. o In particular, the following issues gave rise to long discussions. The Definition of Torture - The definition of torture which appeared in the Torture Declaration was considered not to be precise enough and was criticized on various points. Jurisdiction - The discussion centered round the concept of so-called universal jurisdiction. o In other words, the question was whether each State should undertake, in respect of torture, to assume jurisdiction not only based on territory or the offender’s nationality but over acts of torture committed outside its territory by persons not being its nationals. The principle of universal jurisdiction – which had already been accepted in conventions against hijacking of aircraft and other terrorist acts – was eventually