The book examines the process and the impact of the International Military Tribunal for the Far East (IMTFE), otherwise known as the Tokyo Trial, which was convened in 1946 to try the Japanese leaders accused of committing war crimes during World War II. Offering valuable research materials, it studies the lessons learned from the failed attempt after World War I, and the background and establishment of the IMTFE. It elaborates on the Charter, the Indictment, the Proceeding Records, and the Judgment of the IMTFE, with an emphasis on principles of international law and other legal questions, often with reference to the Nuremberg Trial. It also discusses the structure and different parts of the court organization, the selection and prosecution of Class-A war criminals, and the trial procedures especially those relating to evidence. The author’s personal experience and his criticism of certain aspects of the Tokyo Trial make it most insightful for the reader. From the perspective of a Chinese judge, this unique text brings in the dimensions of both international law and international relations, and allows us to measure the significance and legacy of the Tokyo Trial for contemporary international criminal justice. The author’s manuscript of this book was written in Chinese in the mid-1960s as part of a larger project, and was initially published in 1988. This is the first time that this book has been translated into English.

This book assesses the historical significance of the International Military Tribunal for the Far East (IMTFE)--commonly called the Tokyo trial--established as the eastern counterpart of the Nuremberg trial in the immediate aftermath of World War II. Through extensive research in Japanese, American, Australian, and Indian archives, Yuma Totani taps into a large body of previously underexamined sources to explore some of the central misunderstandings and historiographical distortions that have persisted to the present day. Foregrounding these voluminous records, Totani disputes the notion that the trial was an exercise in "victors' justice" in which the legal process was egregiously compromised for political and ideological reasons; rather, the author details the achievements of the Allied prosecution teams in documenting war crimes and establishing the responsibility of the accused parties to show how the IMTFE represented a sound application of the legal principles established at Nuremberg. This study deepens our knowledge of the historical intricacies surrounding the Tokyo trial and advances our understanding of the Japanese conduct of war and occupation during World War II, the range of postwar debates on war guilt, and the relevance of the IMTFE to the continuing development of international humanitarian law.

The book examines the process and the impact of the International Military Tribunal for the Far East (IMTFE), otherwise known as the Tokyo Trial, which was convened in 1946 to try the Japanese leaders accused of committing war crimes during World War II. Offering valuable research materials, it studies the lessons learned from the failed attempt after World War I, and the background and establishment of the IMTFE. It elaborates on the Charter, the Indictment, the Proceeding Records, and the Judgment of the IMTFE, with an emphasis on principles of international law and other legal questions, often with reference to the Nuremberg Trial. It also discusses the structure and different parts of the court organization, the selection and prosecution of Class-A war criminals, and the trial procedures especially those relating to evidence. The author’s personal experience and his criticism of certain aspects of the Tokyo Trial make it most insightful for the reader. From the perspective of a Chinese judge, this unique text brings in the dimensions of both international law and international relations, and allows us to measure the significance and legacy of the Tokyo Trial for contemporary international criminal justice. The author’s manuscript of this book was written in Chinese in the mid-1960s as part of a larger project, and was initially published in 1988. This is the first time that this book has been translated into English.

In the years since the Japanese war crimes trials concluded, the proceedings have been colored by charges of racism, vengeance, and guilt. In this book, Tim Maga contends that in the trials good law was practiced and evil did not go unpunished. The defendants ranged from lowly Japanese Imperial Army privates to former prime ministers. Since they did not represent a government for which genocide was a policy pursuit, their cases were more difficult to prosecute than those of Nazi war criminals. In contrast to Nuremberg, the efforts in Tokyo, Guam, and other locations throughout the Pacific received little attention by the Western press. Once the Cold War began, America needed Pacific allies and the atrocities committed by Japanese soldiers throughout the 1930s and early 1940s were rarely mentioned. The trials were described as phony justice and "Japan bashing". Keenan and his compatriots adopted criminal court tactics and established precedents in the conduct of war crimes trials that still stand today. Maga reviews the context for the trials, recounts the proceedings, and concludes that they were, in fact, decent examples of American justice and fair play.

Challenges the persistent orthodoxies of the Tokyo tribunal and provides a new framework for evaluating the trial, revealing its importance to international jurisprudence.

In the aftermath of World War II, the Allied intent to bring Axis crimes to light led to both the Nuremberg trials and their counterpart in Tokyo, the International Military Tribunal of the Far East. Yet the Tokyo Trial failed to prosecute imperial Japanese leaders for the worst of war crimes: inhumane medical experimentation, including vivisection and open-air pathogen and chemical tests, which rivaled Nazi atrocities, as well as mass attacks using plague, anthrax, and cholera that killed thousands of Chinese civilians. In Hidden Atrocities, Jeanne Guillemin goes behind the scenes at the trial to reveal the American obstruction that denied justice to Japan’s victims. Responsibility for Japan’s secret germ-warfare program, organized as Unit 731 in Harbin, China, extended to top government leaders and many respected scientists, all of whom escaped indictment. Instead, motivated by early Cold War tensions, U.S. military intelligence in Tokyo insinuated itself into the Tokyo Trial by blocking prosecution access to key witnesses and then classifying incriminating documents. Washington decision makers, supported by the American occupation leader, General Douglas MacArthur, sought to acquire Japan’s biological-warfare expertise to gain an advantage over the Soviet Union, suspected of developing both biological and nuclear weapons. Ultimately, U.S. national-security goals left the victims of Unit 731 without vindication. Decades later, evidence of the Unit 731 atrocities still troubles relations between China and Japan. Guillemin’s vivid account of the cover-up at the Tokyo Trial shows how without guarantees of transparency, power politics can jeopardize international justice, with persistent consequences.

This book investigates the political context and intentions behind the trialling of Japanese war criminals in the wake of World War Two. After the Second World War in Asia, the victorious Allies placed around 5,700 Japanese on trial for war crimes. Ostensibly crafted to bring perpetrators to justice, the trials intersected in complex ways with the great issues of the day. They were meant to finish off the business of World War Two and to consolidate United States hegemony over Japan in the Pacific, but they lost impetus as Japan morphed into an ally of the West in the Cold War. Embattled colonial powers used the trials to bolster their authority against nationalist revolutionaries, but they found the principles of international humanitarian law were sharply at odds with the inequalities embodied in colonialism. Within nationalist movements, local enmities often overshadowed the reckoning with Japan. And hovering over the trials was the critical question: just what was justice for the Japanese in a world where all sides had committed atrocities?

Written by the Director of the Tokyo Trial Research Centre at China's Shanghai Jiao Tong University, this book provides a unique analysis of war crime trials in Asia-Pacific after World War II. It offers a comprehensive review of key events during this period, covering preparations for the Trial, examining the role of the War Crimes Commission of the United Nations as well as offering a new analysis of the trial itself. Addressing the question of conventional war crimes, crimes against humanity, crimes against peace (such as the Pearl Harbor Incident) and violations of warfare law, it follows up with a discussion of post-trial events and the fate of war criminals on trial. Additionally, it examines other Japanese war crime trials which happened in Asia, as well as considering the legacy of the Tokyo trial itself, and the foundation of a new Post-War International Order in East Asia.

Beginning in late 1945, the United States, Britain, China, Australia, France, the Netherlands, and later the Philippines, the Soviet Union, and the People's Republic of China convened national courts to prosecute Japanese military personnel for war crimes. The defendants included ethnic Koreans and Taiwanese who had served with the armed forces as Japanese subjects. In Tokyo, the International Military Tribunal for the Far East tried Japanese leaders. While the fairness of these trials has been a focus for decades, Japanese War Criminals instead argues that the most important issues arose outside the courtroom. What was the legal basis for identifying and detaining subjects, determining who should be prosecuted, collecting evidence, and granting clemency after conviction? The answers to these questions helped set the norms for transitional justice in the postwar era and today contribute to strategies for addressing problematic areas of international law. Examining the complex moral, ethical, legal, and political issues surrounding the Allied prosecution project, from the first investigations during the war to the final release of prisoners in 1958, Japanese War Criminals shows how a simple effort to punish the guilty evolved into a multidimensional struggle that muddied the assignment of criminal responsibility for war crimes. Over time, indignation in Japan over Allied military actions, particularly the deployment of the atomic bombs, eclipsed anger over Japanese atrocities, and, among the Western powers, new Cold War imperatives took hold. This book makes a unique contribution to our understanding of the construction of the postwar international order in Asia and to our comprehension of the difficulties of implementing transitional justice.