The Nizkor Project: Remembering the Holocaust (Shoah)

Shofar FTP Archive File: imt//tgmwc/tgmwc-15/tgmwc-15-143.05

Archive/File: imt/tgmwc/tgmwc-15/tgmwc-15-143.05
Last-Modified: 2000/03/27

Q. I asked you whether you knew of this document. You said
"no", did you not?

A. I did not know it - I do know it now. I did not know it
previously since it was not addressed to me.

Q. You said that, broadly speaking, you did know about this
directive, and you asked me to allow you to acquaint
yourself with it in detail. This is how it was translated to

A. Yes, I told you - and I should like to stress the fact -
that I did not remember, that I only asked for this document
to be placed before me later on. The document is not
addressed to me. The office to which it is addressed is
clearly indicated and according to this it never came into
my hands or reached my office.

Q. In order that you may fully understand this question, I
shall give you Exhibit USA 206. That is your directive of
the 22nd August, 1944, with regard

                                                  [Page 193]

to supplying manpower by importation from the Occupied
Territories. Do you know about this directive?

THE PRESIDENT: What is the PS number?

GENERAL ALEXANDROV: One minute, please. Unfortunately, I do
not have any information about the PS number. All I have is
the Exhibit USA, which is number 206. Defendant Sauckel -

THE PRESIDENT: Have the United States Prosecutors got the
corresponding number to USA 206?

MR. DODD: I could have it in a few minutes, Mr. President. I
do not have it here at the moment, but I will obtain it.

THE PRESIDENT: Right, thank you.


Q. Defendant Sauckel, sub-paragraph 8 of this order states,
"This order applies also to prisoners of war". Does it
contain a reference of this description?

A. Yes.

Q. Therefore, you yourself did not differentiate between
prisoners of war and the civilian population as far as their
utilization in the German war industries was concerned. Do
you admit that?

A. Yes, and I have already answered my Defence Counsel and I
think it was yesterday, that I was shown a schedule
according to which prisoners of war might be employed. But
this paragraph 8 has nothing to do with this document, for
that was an agreement or an order which did not come to me
and was also not addressed to me.

GENERAL ALEXANDROV: Mr. President, Exhibit USA 206 bears the
following number: PS-3044.

Q. In addition to those statements to your Defence Counsel
which you have already mentioned, you also declared that
although employing prisoners of war in the German war
industries, the provisions of the Geneva Conventions were
nevertheless observed. Do you remember saying that?

A. Yes, and it is also proved by documentary evidence that
in the Reich Labour Ministry and in my offices the directive
was issued and circulated that the Geneva Convention was
also to be observed with regard to Soviet prisoners of war.

Q. You did not differentiate at all between Soviet prisoners
of war and civilian workers? Does that result from the

A. No, that is not true at all.

Q. In other words, a violation of these conventions occurred
in the utilization of manpower, inasmuch as they, the
prisoners of war, were treated by you in the same way as the
civilians and were utilised in the industries for the
purpose of waging war.

A. I meant... In that case, I must have misunderstood you,
or you may have misunderstood me. I particularly declared
that I did attach importance to it, and that it was printed,
and that during the time I was in office a special copy was
published for the factories and the interested parties, in
which it was stipulated that the Geneva Convention was to be
observed. I could do no more than that.

Q. Your Defence Counsel questioned you in connection with
the operation known under the code name of "Hay". You
answered his question as follows, and I quote from the

  "Sauckel: No, I had nothing to do with this particular

I shall now hand you a letter from Alfred Meyer, dated 11th
July, I944. This is Document PS-199. It is a letter
addressed to you. Will you please study sub-paragraph 1, it

                                                  [Page 194]

  "Army Recruiting Staff 'Mitte' (Kriegseinsatzkommando
  'Mitte'), hitherto stationed in Minsk, must continue its
  activities with regard to the recruitment of young White
  Ruthenian and Russian workers for military employment
  within the Reich. The staff has the additional task of
  conducting young folk between 10-14 years of age to the

Have you found this passage?

A. That is a... I have read the passage and wish to answer
in this connection that the letter, to be sure, is addressed
to me but it was only sent to me for my information, or,
however, that I had nothing to do with this event, either in
my office or personally. I have... yet that was... that has
certainly been stated already in the case of the defendant
Schirach, I did not carry it out within these offices, and
Labour Allocation, as an office, was not involved in it. I
personally do not remember, either.

Q. What were your relations with the Army Recruiting Staff
"Mitte" (Kriegseinsatzkommando "Mitte")? Was that your

A. I do not understand your question. What Staff do you

Q. The Staff referred to in Alfred Meyer's letter, Staff
"Mitte", dealing with the utilization of manpower.

A. I cannot find the word "Staff".

Q. Right in the beginning of the sentence: "It is imperative
that the Army Recruiting Staff."

A. The Army Recruiting Staff "Mitte" is a term completely
unknown to me. I do not know what it was, or whether it was
a military or a civilian office. It had nothing to do with
me. I do not know it.

Q. You have testified, here and now, that the State Security
Administration had introduced special identification marks
for people brought in from the Occupied Territories. For the
Soviet citizens the mark was... can you not hear me?

A. I cannot understand the translation.

Q. You have testified before the Tribunal that for people
brought in from the Occupied Territories special
identification marks were introduced. For the Soviet
citizens the marking was "Ost", for Polish citizens it was
the letter "P". You testified that you were not in agreement
with the marking. What did you do to stop this insult?

A. I persistently tried to avoid the identification markings
altogether. But the Reichsfuehrer SS categorically demanded
- to the best of my knowledge there is a letter from him to
that effect - that these foreign workers who, at my request,
were free to move about Germany, had to be marked when they
went out of their camps. It was no insult. I should like to
emphasize expressly that I did not consider this as an

Q. That is your point of view. Did you discuss the matter at
all with your immediate superior, the defendant Goering?

A. I can no longer remember today whether I spoke directly
with Goering or not. I can only declare that I made repeated
efforts to stop the practice, and that in March 1944, I
believe, my efforts were actually crowned with success and
the small identity mark, "Ost", was changed to a national
badge on the sleeve, as had been suggested by liaison
officers for the various peoples in the East.

Q. I asked you whether you discussed the matter with

A. I cannot remember. It could be. Yes, it could be. The
matter was frequently discussed.

THE PRESIDENT: General Alexandrov, I think you might pass on
from this.

Q. In reply to questions by your Defence Counsel and by my
French colleague in regard to Speer's attitude to your
appointment as Plenipotentiary General, you mentioned that
you did not know anything at all about it. You will now be
handed an article from the newspaper, Volkischer Beobachter.
This is Exhibit USSR 467, and I am submitting it to the
Tribunal. This article was

                                                  [Page 195]

published on 28th March, 1942, in connection with your
appointment as Plenipotentiary General. It has even got your
photograph, as you can see for yourself. Have you found the
passage with the following statement:

  "The appointment, by the wish of Reich Minister Speer, of
  Gauleiter Sauckel was also due to the extraordinary
  importance of labour allocation (Arbeitseinsatz) in the
  armament industry".

We assume that you must have read the article. Did you read
the article?

A. I really cannot say so positively at this moment. It is,
however, possible or probable. I never had much time to read
the papers. But I should like to tell you very definitely,
General, that during my term of office I transferred over
five million German workers from the most widely different
branches of German industry into the armament economy.
Therefore, it was a task, which dealt principally with
German workers and their transfer.

Q. I was interested in something else: Why was defendant
Speer interested in your personal appointment as
Plenipotentiary General? That is what I wanted to ascertain.
Can you tell me anything in this respect?

A. I cannot tell you why Reich Minister Speer was interested
in my appointment. I have already told my Defence Counsel
that I myself was surprised at the time.

Q. You maintain that owing to the existing shortage of
native manpower, the Hitlerite Government embarked on the
criminal method of driving civilian populations into slavery
and of utilising both the prisoners of war and the peace-
loving citizens of the Occupied Territories in the German
war industries? Is that what you maintain?

THE PRESIDENT: General Alexandrov, I have already pointed
out to you twice that it is not right for you to put
questions using such language as that - crimes or violation
of treaties - for it involved assuming the guilt of the


Q. You maintain that owing to a shortage of native manpower
within the country, the Hitlerite Government undertook the
mobilization and utilization, in the war industries of
Germany, of the peaceful citizens in the Occupied
Territories as well as of the prisoners of war. Is that

A. I have already answered this question in great detail to
my Defence Counsel. I clearly stated that on my appointment
I proposed a different programme, but the Fuehrer and other
offices were not satisfied with this programme and gave me
their respective orders, accompanied by relevant comments
and directives.

Q. You yourself affirmed that Germany's manpower reserves
were exhausted. Did you mention that?

A. In the performance of my duties I repeatedly pointed out
that both in Germany as well as in the Occupied Territories,
labour allocations had been exhausted by existing economic
tasks, and could no longer be carried out properly. That is
clear from my manifesto. Moreover -

Q. I shall now refer to a letter from defendant Speer,
addressed to you on 22nd January, 1944. I quote this
document, which is in the Document Book of the defendant
Speer. It is numbered "Speer 06". In this document the
defendant Speer draws your attention to the insufficient
utilization of manpower.

DR. FLAECHSNER (Counsel for defendant Speer): I have
selected from my document book a document which refers to a
subject about to be discussed here.

Whether I shall make use of the document will only appear in
the course of the proceedings. I do not consider it proper
for the prosecution to use my documents before I myself can
actually join in the proceedings. I therefore ask for the
decision of the Tribunal.

THE TRIBUNAL: The Tribunal thinks the motion should be
granted and that you ought not to be allowed to use the
document until the defendants' counsel have used the

                                                  [Page 196]

GENERAL ALEXANDROV: I must then ask you to exclude from the
transcript the preceding question alluding to shortage of
native manpower resources in Germany, for it then loses its

THE PRESIDENT: Very well, if you wish it.



Q. Your Defence Counsel acquainted you with Document ETs-68
during the session of 29th May. This document deals with the
treatment of foreign workers of Polish nationality. I shall
not dwell upon the subject, since your Defence Counsel has
already quoted the document in detail, and I will limit
myself to your reply intended for your Defence Counsel, as
it appears in the transcript of that session. I read from
the transcript:

  "Sauckel: First of all, I should like to point out that
  this document is dated 6th March, 1941, that is, more
  than a year before I assumed office. Such a nonsensical
  and impossible decree never came to my attention during
  my term of office. But since I am now being confronted
  with the document and am seeing it, I should like to
  refer to my own decrees which I issued entirely
  independently of the past, and whereby such decrees were
  automatically destroyed..."

(The word "revoked" used in the above quotation during the
session of 29th May has been translated as "destroyed" by
the interpreter.)

Do you remember these depositions given at the session of
the 29th May of the current year?

A. Yes.

THE PRESIDENT: General, I am told that this is an incorrect
translation. It was "revoked" and not "destroyed". You said
"destroyed", did you not?

GENERAL ALEXANDROV: I am reading from the Russian transcript
and perhaps there are certain inaccuracies in it, but I do
not object to replacing "destroy" by "revoke". The meaning
remains the same.

THE WITNESS: May I ask for the context to be repeated - it
is not quite clear.


Q. No, I do not want to revert to Document ETs-68. All I
want is to establish what you did say in reply to your
Defence Counsel in connection with this document. You do not
contradict your testimony which I have just read into the
record? Does it correspond to the statement you made here on
the 29th May?

A. No, but I do not understand what the word "destroyed" has
to do with it.

Q. We should not use the word "destroyed" but use the word

A. That is possible.

Q. You confirm the testimony which I have just read into the
record from the transcript?

A. Yes.

Q. Now, tell us, do you remember the living conditions you
imposed on the Ukrainian women and girls from the Occupied
Territories, on those who had been mobilised for work in
German agriculture?

I shall now hand you Exhibit USSR 365 - I beg you pardon,

(Witness handed document.)

Home ·  Site Map ·  What's New? ·  Search Nizkor

© The Nizkor Project, 1991-2012

This site is intended for educational purposes to teach about the Holocaust and to combat hatred. Any statements or excerpts found on this site are for educational purposes only.

As part of these educational purposes, Nizkor may include on this website materials, such as excerpts from the writings of racists and antisemites. Far from approving these writings, Nizkor condemns them and provides them so that its readers can learn the nature and extent of hate and antisemitic discourse. Nizkor urges the readers of these pages to condemn racist and hate speech in all of its forms and manifestations.