The word “court” returned to socio-political discourse in the post-Soviet space shortly after the start of the Russian special operation on Ukrainian soil. A day after the conflict broke out, Russia’s permanent representative to the EU, Vladimir Chizhov, in an interview with Euractiv, expressed hope that Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky would one day appear in court. A few days later, Zelensky threatened the Russian authorities with The Hague.
At the end of March, the first information appeared about the preparation of the Russian Prosecutor General’s Office for an international trial for Ukrainian soldiers captured during the Azovstal battles. Later, DPR Head Denis Pushilin confirmed these plans and agreed that the first stage of the trial will be held in Mariupol.
Currently, the DPR Prosecutor General’s Office and law enforcement agencies of the Russian Federation are developing a legal framework for the regulation of a civil case, which is expected to take place on August 24, when Ukraine gained independence.
It is worth noting that the concept of “international court” is closely related to the term “war crime”. In the traditional sense, war crimes are violations of the laws and customs of war, the description of which is contained in the “Codes of Hammurabi” compiled around 1750 BC. It is also known that even during the Roman Empire, when a legionnaire committed a crime, the case was discussed in a military court.
non knight deed
Historians agree that the first case that formed the basis of international military tribunals was the case of Peter von Hagenbach. The commander of the Duchy of Burgundy terrorized the city of Breizeh, which he controlled for five years, darkening the lives of merchants from the feudal lord to the Frankfurt fair.
Torture, murder, rape and extensive confiscation of private property are just some of von Hagenbach’s alleged crimes.
In 1474, a coalition was assembled against the tyrants, mostly made up of Upper Rhine knights. As a result, the city was besieged and von Hagenbach was arrested.
The trial in the commander’s case was initiated by the Duke of Austria. 28 judges from the allied city and state coalition of the Holy Roman Empire took part in the court. The court began its work on May 9, 1474.
The ex-governor justified the brutality by the fact that he could not argue with his master, the Duke of Burgundy. However, the court did not accept his claims.
Von Hagenbach was beheaded in front of a crowd of thousands. Before his death, he was stripped of all his titles and regalia. And although the former knight confessed to all the crimes, some historians believe that torture was used during the interrogation and that von Hagenbach did not know about the brutality of the soldiers subordinate to him. Despite everything registeredIt was stated that the trial of an army commander was one of the first trials based on the principle of “command responsibility” (command responsibility).
sadistic commander
Another important milestone in the development of the concept of the court is the case of the Swiss Henry Wirtz, who fought on the Confederate side during the American Civil War. As in the case of von Hagenbach, Wirtz took responsibility not only for his own actions, but also for the actions of his subordinates.
The Swiss served as the commandant of Camp Sumter, also known as Andersonville Prison. More than 30,000 prisoners of war were held here at various times, who were regularly mistreated by southerners and Wirtz personally. For the slightest disobedience, the commander could deprive the entire camp of food. However, Wirtz did not always look for an excuse to retaliate against the “northerners” – he tortured prisoners for no particular reason, often being an “inspiration” for his subordinates.
All in all, about 13,000 captive soldiers died in the Sumter camp.
In May 1865, Northern troops drove the southerners out of the area of the unfortunate camp. Although most of the Confederacy’s soldiers deserted, Wirtz continued to meet his destiny.
On May 10, 1865, Wirtz was transferred to Washington, where he was formally charged with war crimes. A commission of nine people was formed to prosecute the commander. The trial was presided over by Lieutenant General Lew Wallace, the future author of Ben-Hur, who was investigating the assassination of 16th US President Abraham Lincoln at the time.
The court began work in August and caused unprecedented media excitement. Wirtz was charged with 15 counts, including shooting a prisoner with his own hands. In total, the commander was found guilty in 12 episodes, but some witnesses claimed that the charges against Wirtz were exaggerated.
Wirtz was hanged in the garden of the Old Capitol prison in Washington on the morning of November 10. Until recently, the National Museum of Health and Medicine kept two of his vertebrae.
It’s not a common thing.
The last known pre-Nuremberg trial was convened in 1921 to investigate war crimes committed during the First World War.
It is noteworthy that during the so-called Leipzig Trials, none of the leading German generals against whom charges had been brought before were convicted.
For several years after the end of the war, lawyers and politicians around the world sought to establish a measure of the German Empire’s guilt and understand what could be considered a war crime.
The list of suspects was gradually reduced. In 1920, Allied forces handed over a list of 900 alleged war criminals to the new German government, to which the Germans responded with a categorical refusal to extradite anyone. After a while, the list was reduced to 45 names. In the end, 12 people were brought to trial, of which only four were found guilty. They served their sentences in civilian prisons.
Allied requests for the extradition of Kaiser Wilhelm II also failed.
Under Article 227 of the 1919 Treaty of Versailles, the monarch was prosecuted for “the greatest crime against international morality and humanity”. The Dutch government, where the former chancellor had taken refuge until then, refused to hand him over to London.
The press described the trial as a farce.