See Paper of Jonathan Graubart, San Diego State University, Political Science Department, published online Graubart Article互联网档案馆的存檔,存档日期2011-04-30., referring to the ex post facto nature of the charges.
See, e.g.,BBC Article for BBC by Prof. Richard Overy (页面存档备份,存于互联网档案馆) ("[T]hat the war crimes trials ... were expressions of a legally dubious 'victors' justice' was [a point raised by] ...senior [Allied] legal experts who doubted the legality of the whole process... There was no precedent. No other civilian government had ever been put on trial by the authorities of other states... What the Allied powers had in mind was a tribunal that would make the waging of aggressive war, the violation of sovereignty and the perpetration of what came to be known in 1945 as 'crimes against humanity' internationally recognized offences.
Unfortunately, these had not previously been defined as crimes in international law, which left the Allies in the legally dubious position of having to execute retrospective justice - to punish actions that were not regarded as crimes at the time they were committed.")
See, e.g., statement of Professor Nicholls of St. Antony's College, Oxford, that "[t]he Nuremberg trials have not had a very good press. The are often depicted as a form of victors' justice in which people were tried for crimes which did not exist in law when they committed them, such as conspiring to start a war."Prof. Anthony Nicholls, University of Oxford (页面存档备份,存于互联网档案馆)
See, e.g.,Zolo互联网档案馆的存檔,存档日期2010-08-13.(Victors' Justice (2009) by Danilo Zolo, Professor of Philosophy and Sociology of Law at the University of Florence.
See, e.g.,Zolo互联网档案馆的存檔,存档日期2010-08-13.(Victors' Justice (2009) by Danilo Zolo, Professor of Philosophy and Sociology of Law at the University of Florence.
See, e.g., statement of Professor Nicholls of St. Antony's College, Oxford, that "[t]he Nuremberg trials have not had a very good press. The are often depicted as a form of victors' justice in which people were tried for crimes which did not exist in law when they committed them, such as conspiring to start a war."Prof. Anthony Nicholls, University of Oxford (页面存档备份,存于互联网档案馆)
See, e.g.,BBC Article for BBC by Prof. Richard Overy (页面存档备份,存于互联网档案馆) ("[T]hat the war crimes trials ... were expressions of a legally dubious 'victors' justice' was [a point raised by] ...senior [Allied] legal experts who doubted the legality of the whole process... There was no precedent. No other civilian government had ever been put on trial by the authorities of other states... What the Allied powers had in mind was a tribunal that would make the waging of aggressive war, the violation of sovereignty and the perpetration of what came to be known in 1945 as 'crimes against humanity' internationally recognized offences.
Unfortunately, these had not previously been defined as crimes in international law, which left the Allies in the legally dubious position of having to execute retrospective justice - to punish actions that were not regarded as crimes at the time they were committed.")
See Paper of Jonathan Graubart, San Diego State University, Political Science Department, published online Graubart Article互联网档案馆的存檔,存档日期2011-04-30., referring to the ex post facto nature of the charges.