THE PRESIDENT: Will you say, for the purposes of the shorthand note,
that you offer them in evidence?
M. FAURE: Will you excuse me? I should like to point out that I submit
as evidence Document Number RF-925 as well as Document Number RF-924 of
which I spoke just now.
This is from the interrogation of Heinrich Schnurbusch, leader of the
liaison service in the Reich Commission on 8 January 1946 in Oslo:
“Question: ‘How did the German departments try to achieve this
National Socialist conversion?’
I wish to point out to the Tribunal that I have passed over the first
three questions as they are not of much interest.
“Answer: ‘We sought to strengthen this movement by the means
which we were accustomed to apply in Germany for leading the
masses. The Nasjonal Samling benefited by having at their
disposal all the means of news service and propaganda. But we
soon saw that the object could not be achieved. After 25
September 1940 the public mood in Norway changed suddenly when
some State Councillors were appointed as NS State Councillors,
for Quisling’s action in the days of April 1940 was considered
treason by the Norwegian people.’
“Question: ‘In what way did you assist materially the NS Samling
in this propaganda? In what way did you counsel the NS Samling?’
“Answer: ‘During the time I was in office, when a propaganda
drive was made, it was always brought into line with the
propaganda which the Germans made in Norway.’
“Question: ‘Did you issue any directives for the NS Samling?’
“Answer: ‘No. In my time the NS Samling worked independently in
this respect, and partly even contrary to our advice. The NS
Samling took the view that it understood better the Norwegian
mentality, but it made many mistakes.’
“Question: ‘Was financial support given?’
“Answer: ‘Certainly, financial help was given, but I don’t know
the exact amount.’”
THE PRESIDENT: Shall we adjourn for 10 minutes?
[_A recess was taken._]
M. FAURE: I should like first of all to point out to the Tribunal that,
with its permission, I shall examine this afternoon the Witness Van der
Essen concerning whom a formal request has already been submitted.
THE PRESIDENT: Yes, M. Faure.
M. FAURE: This witness can then be called at the beginning of the
afternoon session.
The observations which I have just presented had to do with Norway.
In the Netherlands, unlike what happened in Norway, the Nazis did not
utilize the local Party as an official instrument of government. The
governmental authority was completely in the hands of the Reich
Commissioner who set up a sort of ministry, including four German
General Commissioners, respectively competent for government and
justice, public security, finance, and economic affairs, and special
affairs. This organization was created by a decree of 3 June 1940
(_Official Gazette_ for Holland, 1940, Number 5). I point out that, as
the Dutch _Official Gazette_ has already been submitted in evidence to
the Tribunal, I shall not again submit each of these texts, which are a
part of it. I shall, therefore, simply ask the Tribunal to take judicial
notice of them and to consider them as proved.
The holders of the posts of General Commissioners were appointed by the
decree of 5 June 1940.
The local authorities were represented at the higher level only by the
Secretaries General of the Ministries, who were entirely under the
authority of the Reich Commissioner and of the General Commissioners.
The decree of 29 May 1940, which is in the Dutch _Official Gazette_,
1940, Page 8, lays down in its first article:
“The Reich Commissioner will exercise the powers invested until
now in the King and the Government. . . .”
And in Article 3:
“The Secretaries General of the Dutch ministries are responsible
to the Reich Commissioner.”
If the Nazi Party did not constitute the Government, it nevertheless
received the official blessing.
I shall quote to the Tribunal in this connection the decree of 30
January 1943, which likewise is in the Dutch _Official Gazette_, 1943,
Page 63. I read the following passage:
“The representative of the political will of the Dutch people is
the National Socialist movement of the Netherlands. I have,
therefore, decreed that all the German offices under my orders,
of the administration and those of the National Socialist
movement, shall maintain close contact with the leader of the
Movement in order to assure the co-ordination of the tasks in
carrying out important administrative measures and particularly
for all matters concerning personnel.”
The Tribunal knows already, for it is common knowledge, and insofar as
it might be necessary through the witness who has already been heard,
how outrageously untrue it was to claim that the Dutch National
Socialist Party represented the political will of the people of this
country.
Having commented on these two forms of utilization of the local party as
agents of sovereignty, I should now like to point out to the Tribunal
the main features of these usurpations which were committed by the
Germans.
A first line of action is exemplified by the attempt to induce the
occupied countries to participate in the war or, at the very least, to
initiate recruitment for the German Army. In Norway the Nazis created
the “SS Norge,” a formation which later was called the “Germanske SS
Norge.” I submit as evidence Document Number RF-926, which is the decree
of 21 July 1942, concerning the “Germanske SS Norge,” and I quote
Paragraph 2 of this decree, which is a Quisling decree.
“2. ‘The Germanske SS Norge’ is a National Socialist order of
soldiers which shall consist of men of Nordic blood and ideas.
It is an independent subdivision of the Nasjonal Samling,
directly under the NS Foerer (NS Leader) and responsible to him.
It is, at the same time, a section of the ‘Stor-Germanske
SS’”—the SS of Greater Germany—“and shall help to lead the
Germanic peoples towards a new future and create the basis of a
Germanic fellowship.”
We see again, by this example, that the interventions of the so-called
Norwegian Government are perfectly obvious methods of Germanization. In
order to facilitate the recruiting into this legion, the German or
Norwegian Nazis did not hesitate to upset the civil legislation and to
abolish the abiding principles of family rights by making a law which
exempted minors from having to obtain the consent of their parents. This
is a law of 1 February 1941, Norwegian _Official Gazette_, 1941, Page
153, which I submit in evidence as Document Number RF-927.
In the Netherlands the Germans were obliged to upset even more the
national legislation in order to permit military recruitment. As they
did not create a factitious government and as the legitimate government
was still at war with the Reich, the volunteers came under Articles 101
and the following articles of the Dutch penal code, which punished those
enlisted in the army of a foreign power at war with the Netherlands and
likewise those who give aid to the enemy.
By reason of the _de facto_ occupation of the country there was little
chance of these penalties being effectively applied, but it is very
curious and very revealing that the Reich Commissioner issued a decree
of 25 July 1941, Dutch _Official Gazette_, 1941, Number 135. This decree
states that the taking of Dutchmen for service in the German Army, the
Waffen SS, or the Legion of Netherlands Volunteers does not bring them
under the provisions of the penal texts mentioned above, and this decree
is declared retroactive to 10 May 1940. It is therefore very convenient,
when one commits a criminal act according to the general code, to be
able to modify the law to suppress the crime in question.
Another decree of 25 July 1941, _Official Gazette_ for 1941, Page 548,
stipulates that enrollment in the German Army will no longer involve
loss of Dutch nationality.
Finally, a decree of 8 August 1941, _Official Gazette_ for 1941, Page
622, declares that the acquisition of German nationality no longer
entails the loss of Dutch nationality except in cases of express
renunciation. Although this last text seems to bring out a point of
detail, it may be regarded as an initial attempt to create later a
double Dutch and German nationality, which will fit into the general
procedures for the advancement of the whole plan of Germanization.
In regard to these measures for military recruitment, I should like to
state precisely the attitude of the Prosecution as a result of the
examination and cross-examination of the witness, Vorrink, who was heard
on Saturday. The Prosecution does not consider that the criminal
character of this military recruitment is established only by the fact
of having recruited persons by force or by pressure upon their will.
This pressure and this constraint are an aggravating and characteristic
aspect but not a necessary aspect of the criminal action which we
reprehend. The fact of having recruited persons, even on a voluntary
basis, in the occupied countries for service in the German Army, is
considered by us as a crime. This crime is moreover punishable under the
internal legislation of all these countries, whose legislation covers
such acts as those committed in these countries, in accordance with the
rules of law in matters of legislative competence.
It is even relatively of small importance, except for knowing all the
details, whether the recruiting of traitors was favored or not by
particular pressure according to the situation in which these traitors
found themselves.
I should like also to indicate in a more general way, that the
Prosecution does not consider that the recruiting of traitors, either
for service in the Army or in other activities, is for the Nazi leaders
an extenuating circumstance or an exonerating one. On the contrary, it
is one of the characteristics of their criminal activity; and the
responsibility of the traitors in no way exempts them from
responsibility. On the contrary, we hold against them this corruption
which they attempted to spread in the occupied countries by appealing to
those elements of weak morality which may be found in the population of
a country and by instilling in the mind of each person the thought of
possible immoral and criminal activity against his country.
This was a first line of action for German usurpation: namely, the
enrollment of troops.
A second general line of action is identified with the whole of the
measures designed to abolish civil liberties and to set up the
Leadership Principle. I shall quote some of these measures by way of
example.
In Norway, suppression of political parties, German decree of 25
September 1940, which is in the _Official Gazette_ for 1940, Page 19; a
decree forbidding all activity in favor of the legitimate dynasty,
decree of 7 October 1940, in the _Official Gazette_ for 1940, Page 10;
the guarantees under the statutory rules for officials were suppressed,
they could be transferred or dismissed for political reasons, German
decree of 4 October 1940, Page 24. Finally, a Norwegian law of 18
September 1943, setting up a characteristic institution, that of
departmental chief representing the Party, and responsible to the
Minister President and to no other authority of the State (Document
Number RF-928). He exercised in the department the supreme political
control over all public authorities of the department.
All professions came under the system of compulsory membership with
application of the Leadership Principle.
In Holland we likewise observe the suppression of elected bodies, decree
of 11 August 1941, _Official Gazette_ for 1941, Page 637, which confirms
the decree of 21 June 1940, _Official Gazette_ for 1940, Page 54; the
dissolution of political parties, decree of 4 July 1941, _Official
Gazette_ for 1941, Page 583; creation of the Labor Front, decree of 30
April 1942, _Official Gazette_ for 1942, Page 211; setting up of the
Peasant Corporation, decree of 22 October 1941, _Official Gazette_ for
1941, Page 838.
I have given only a few examples of this principle; and to conclude I
shall quote a decree of 12 August 1941, _Official Gazette_ for 1941,
Page 34, which created a special judicial competence for all offenses
and infringements committed against political peace and against
political interests, or committed for political motives. In fact, the
justices of the peace charged with exercising these oppressive powers
were always chosen from among the members of the Nazi Party.
Finally a third line of action in this campaign of usurpation can be
defined as a systematic campaign against the elite of the country and
against its spiritual life. In fact it is always in this sphere that the
Nazis met with the greatest resistance to their designs. They attacked
the universities and teaching establishments.
In Holland a decree of 25 July 1941, _Official Gazette_ for 1941, Page
559, gives the administration the right to close arbitrarily all private
institutions. In the Netherlands the University of Leyden was closed on
11 November 1941.
By a decree of the Reich Commissioner of 10 May 1943, _Official Gazette_
for 1943, Page 127, the students were forced to sign a declaration of
loyalty drawn up in the following terms:
“The undersigned, ——, hereby solemnly declares on his word of
honor that he will conscientiously conform to the laws, decrees,
and other dispositions in force in Dutch occupied territory and
will abstain from any act directed against the German Reich, the
German Army, or the Dutch authorities, or engage in any activity
which might imperil public order in the higher teaching
institutions in view of the present circumstances and danger.”
In Norway rigorous measures were taken against the University of Oslo. I
offer in evidence Document Number RF-933. I point out to the Tribunal
that this is not in strict order and that Document Number RF-933 is the
last in the document book.
This Document Number RF-933 is an article in the _Deutsche Zeitung_ of 1
December 1943, reproduced in a Norwegian newspaper. It is entitled, “A
Cleaning-Up Measure Necessary in Oslo; Purge in the Student World.” I
shall read only a few paragraphs of this article. I begin with the
second paragraph:
“The students of the University of Oslo”—will the Tribunal excuse me. I
shall read also the first paragraph:
“By order of the Reich Commissioner Terboven, the SS
Obergruppenführer and General of the Police Rediess made the
following announcement to the students in the lecture room of
the University of Oslo on Tuesday afternoon:
“The students of the University of Oslo have attempted to offer
resistance to the German Army of occupation and to the Norwegian
Government recognized by the Reich, since the occupation of
Norway, that is, since 1940.”