TFL Vsebine / Zbornik znanstvenih razprav

Z analizo primarnih in sekundarnih virov v angleškem jeziku avtorica predstavi nekatere značilnosti Mednarodnega vojaškega sodišča za Daljni vzhod, ki je po koncu druge svetovne vojne dve leti in pol zasedalo v Tokiu. Opre se na uradno, pogosto tajno korespondenco nekaterih članov sodišča, saj so njihove misli, izražene domačim institucijam, zelo zanimiv vpogled v delovanje sodišča, njegove značilnosti, meddržavno sestavo in tudi dileme, s katerimi so se pri sprejemanju končne odločitve soočali sodniki. Skozi multilateralno prisotnost in sočasno aplikacijo značilnosti različnih pravnih sistemov – čeprav je sodišče delovalo na osnovi Statuta Mednarodnega vojaškega sodišča za Daljni vzhod in takrat veljavnega mednarodnega prava –, sodniki niso zmogli v celoti izstopiti iz svojih pravnih tradicij in v mnogoplastnih okoliščinah dolgotrajnega dela daleč od doma je prihajalo med udeleženci na lokaciji – in v njihovih odnosih z vodilnimi v domačih državah – do nepričakovanih, dotlej nepoznanih zapletov in merjenj moči na različnih ravneh. Glavna posledica tega je bila neenotnost razsodbe: sprejeta večinska sodba je 25 obtožencev spoznala za krive, sedem jih je obsodila na smrtno kazen. Od enajstih članov senata so trije podali (delno) ločeno odklonilno mnenje, predsednik senata pa je na koncu uradno vložil le izjavo o nestrinjanju z višino kazni. Tako je glavni doprinos tega prispevka razkritje neenotnosti sodnega senata, saj nasprotuje običajno razširjenim predstavam, da je bilo predmetno sojenje »ameriška predstava«.

Through an analysis of primary and secondary sources in the English language, this article aims to shed light on certain characteristics of the International Military Tribunal for the Far East, which convened in Tokyo for two and a half years in the aftermath of World War II. It relies on official, often secret, correspondence from some tribunal members, as their thoughts—expressed to their home institutions—offer an extremely interesting insight into the tribunal’s affairs, its characteristics, intra-state constitution, and the dilemmas faced by the judges when reaching their final decision. Through the tribunal’s multilateral presence and the simultaneous application of elements derived from var- ious legal systems—despite the tribunal’s workings being stipulated by the Charter of the International Military Tribunal for the Far East and existing international law—the judges were unable to detach themselves fully from their own legal traditions. Amid the multi-layered circumstances of prolonged work far from home, this resulted in unexpected entanglements and power struggles on different levels, both among the participants on site and in their relations with leading figures in their home countries. The main effect of this turn of events was a non-uniform final decision: the majority judgement found the 25 accused guilty, condemning seven to the death penalty. From among the 11 senate members, three judges filed a (partial) separate dissenting opinion, while the President eventually filed only a statement disagreeing with some of the penalties. The contribution of this article lies in disclosing the bench’s non-uniformity, since it contests the widespread perception that the trial in question was an “American show”.