|Parent||Remarks to Court on the motion attacking the jurisdiction of the Tribunal|
|Collection||Tavenner Papers & IMTFE Official Records|
|Folder||General Reports and Memoranda from June 1946|
|Repository||University of Virginia Law Library|
In the Cairo Conference, 1 December 1943, the United States of America through President Roosevelt, the Republic of China through Generalissimo Chiang Kai-shek, and the United Kingdom through its Prime Minister Churchill declared: “The several military missions have agreed upon future military operations against Japan. The Three Great Allies expressed their resolve to bring unrelenting pressure against their brutal enemies by sea, land, and air. This pressure is already rising.” That part of the Cairo Conference was carried into strict operation. They also declared: “The Three Great Allies are fighting this war to restrain and punish the aggression of Japan.” What is the fair meaning of this stern warning, “to restrain and punish the aggression of Japan?” Do the accused contend that such punishment should be related only to the unfortunate Japanese people who had no part in bringing about these wars of aggression, who themselves were dupes and victims of these very accused, whose lives were sacrificed in figures running into the millions, and whose cities and harbors were smashed in a manner never before known in history; but the actual perpetrators themselves, the responsible individuals, shall remain unpunished? Is it contended that such is a fair or sensible interpretation of the words of this warning (and this in 1943), and is it contended that these words of warning did not clearly set forth the intention to restrain and punish the aggressors of Japan, the real individuals who brought this scourge upon the Japanese people and a great part of the world? Is it intended when a man holds office wherein the responsibility is lodged and wherein he has taken sacred oaths to support the obligations of his government and all of its covenants, that a mantle of immunity is spread about him by reason of the high office he occupies? Is it contended that Prime Ministers and Foreign Ministers and those war lords who dominate Cabinets may bring about this unjustifiable carnage and destruction with complete immunity because they hold these high offices? That is the real question presented in this motion before this Tribunal.