The Nizkor Project: Remembering the Holocaust (Shoah)

The Trial of Adolf Eichmann
Session 29
(Part 6 of 8)

Holocaust, Adolf Eichmann, Eichmann trial, holocaust, Jewish holocaust
Q. Later, by circuitous routes, you came to Carpatho- Russia, from there to Hungary and then to Austria, to Yugoslavia, to Italy; you tried to reach Palestine, but you were exiled to Cyprus and you came from Cyprus to Israel?

A. Yes.

Q. Radun - was that the town of the Hafetz Haim?

A. Yes.

Presiding Judge: Dr. Servatius, do you have any questions?

Dr. Servatius: I have no questions.

Presiding Judge: Thank you very much, Mr. Aviel, you have concluded your evidence.

Dr. Servatius: Your Honour, The Presiding Judge, may I submit a number of applications?

Presiding Judge: Please hand them to the Clerk of the Court. We shall now adjourn for twenty minutes.

Attorney General: With the Court's permission, I regret that a delay has been caused in proceeding with the session. This delay has been caused due to the fact that the witness Rivka Yoselewska, who was to give evidence, did not appear this morning. At first we were informed by telegram sent on her behalf that she wasn't feeling well. We ascertained whether she would be able to come and it appears that she has suffered a heart attack.

Presiding Judge: An actual heart attack?

Attorney General: An actual heart attack. I notified Defence Counsel of this, and he agrees to my reading her statement to the police which had already been submitted to him, and that this would be regarded as if she had testified here. I ask the Court's permission to admit the statement in this way, for I am not sure if and how I shall be able to produce Mrs. Yoselewska. In view of the contents of her testimony, perhaps the Court will also understand why I am requesting this.

Presiding Judge: Mr. Hausner, this is, nevertheless, a rather serious matter. Perhaps you would first of all clarify whether the witness would be able to appear here in order to testify up to the end of the stage of taking the evidence. And if she cannot, provide us with a medical certificate, and then we shall see.

Attorney General: As the Court pleases. In that case I should not read the statement now?

Presiding Judge: No.

Judge Halevi: Possibly, if she should not recover by the end of the stage of the prosecution's evidence, she would be able to make a sworn statement and perhaps this can be submitted in the form of an affidavit.

Attorney General: As Your Honour pleases. But this is a statement that was taken down...

Presiding Judge: On what subject?

Attorney General: On the operations of the Einsatzgruppen.

Presiding Judge: Very well. But you will do this at the end of the stage of leading evidence. If she will be able to testify here, this would clearly be preferable.

Attorney General: Very well. We shall act in accordance with the Court's decision.

Dr. Servatius: Although I have not yet received the statement of this witness to the police in German, but only in Hebrew, I nevertheless am of the opinion that if her examination here is likely to cause her to be emotionally upset, I would agree to the admission of an affidavit instead of her oral evidence.

Presiding Judge: On this point, too, the doctor will be able to testify. He will be able to tell us whether she will be able to give evidence up to the time when the taking of the evidence will have been completed - a time which you, Mr. Attorney General, know better than the Court; or whether the excitement is likely to harm her. In the latter case, too, we shall certainly take this into consideration.

Attorney General: Arising out of this development I have tried to secure three other witnesses for today - witnesses with whom I wanted, on Monday, to conclude the evidence, at this stage, on the subject of the Einsatzgruppen and the operations in the East, since we intended, commencing at noon on Monday or in the afternoon, to introduce the chapter of extermination in North and West Europe. These witnesses - so I am told - are on their way here, and if they arrive before the Court concludes this session, possibly we may manage to hear one or more or them. If not, we shall attempt, meanwhile, to submit a number of documents.

Presiding Judge: We have to discuss the application of Dr. Servatius to take evidence abroad. Perhaps we can talk about this first. Meanwhile have we received from you, Dr. Servatius, the address of von Thadden?

Dr. Servatius: Yes.

Presiding Judge: And the Attorney General's questionnaires have been submitted to us concerning Dr. Merten, Krumey, Dr. Six and von Thadden. Have you received a copy of these questionnaires?

Dr. Servatius: They have not yet reached me.

Attorney General: I am ready to give the questionnaires to Defence Counsel.

Presiding Judge: I would ask you to do so, for I should like to dispose of this matter by the end of today's session.

Attorney General: Certainly. I would merely ask that the content of the questionnaires, both of Defence Counsel's and of ours, should not be handed over for publication, for it is not desirable that the witnesses should know from the outset, or in advance, what are the questions we intend to put to them.

Presiding Judge: Sir, you may act in this way in regard to your own questions. The point is what Dr. Servatius has already done. I do not know, but this we can hear from him.

Attorney General: To the extent that the matter relates to my questions and also to the extent that it relates to those questions of Dr. Servatius which have not yet been put to those witnesses, I would ask that, from now on, this material should be preserved - both by the secretariat of the Court and by the parties - as material not intended for publication.

Presiding Judge: Mr. Hausner - where is your authority for prohibiting this publication? I assume that such an application may be heard in a Judge's chambers or in the Court Registrar's office and then it would be possible to prohibit the publication of remarks that were made in the Judge's chambers. But to prohibit one of the parties to publish a questionnaire which he himself has prepared - I should like to see your authority for that.

Attorney General: The Court is generally empowered, according to the Courts'law, to forbid certain publications.

Presiding Judge: Certain publications - yes.

Attorney General: In general we are acting in accordance with a special procedure - a procedure for the taking of evidence abroad, which the Court has permitted to us in this instance. And if the Court has permitted it, I ask the Court to permit it on condition that the questionnaires should not be published beforehand, at least as far as my questions are concerned. If Dr. Servatius wishes to publish his questions - he can do as he pleases.

Presiding Judge: That is a different matter. In regard to these questions, it may be said that they have come to the notice of Defence Counsel only as a result of the deliberations in Court. I merely failed to understand this in regard to his own questions.

Attorney General: Defence Counsel is entitled to submit his questions to his witnesses in any way he pleases. According to our practice he is allowed to make contact with them and to inform them what he intends to ask them. And I have no objection to that. I am talking of our questionnaires, since I am revealing, this time in advance, to Defence Counsel something that I would not do in respect of a witness who would be appearing here. I ask that these should not be published.

Presiding Judge: Dr. Servatius, what do you have to say on this matter?

Dr. Servatius: I am ready to reach an agreement with the Prosecution that we should not publish the questionnaires. I think this would be very useful.

Presiding Judge: That is to say, that there will be no publication of either your questionnaires or those of the Attorney General?

Dr. Servatius: Yes.

Presiding Judge: Of course, by consent you can do that.

Dr. Servatius: Certainly.

Presiding Judge: If that is the case, there is no need for a decision.

Attorney General: Except to the extent that the file is open to the press, under the Archives Law.

Presiding Judge: I do not believe that it would be open generally.

Attorney General: But there is a certain usage whereby it is open to the press for inspection.

Presiding Judge: We hand down our


With the consent of the lawyers of both parties we hereby decide that the content of the questionnaires submitted by them and the measures taken by this Court in overseas Courts shall not be released to the public for the time being, in order to ensure the effectiveness of the examination of the witnesses abroad.

I would suggest, Dr. Servatius, that you look at the questionnaires which have been submitted by the Attorney General, so that we can finish this matter and prepare the papers for dispatch overseas. You have now received this in German.

Dr. Servatius: May I bring this to the Court's notice in writing shortly after the session?

Presiding Judge: Yes. I would say that, if you have some comment to make on these questionnaires - and I am assuming that you will not have any comment - but if you do have something to say, you submit your observations in writing to us during the course of the day.

Dr. Servatius: Yes - I am ready to do so.

Presiding Judge: Mr. Hausner, you said that you were prepared to speed this up by sending a courier abroad?

Attorney General: This is what we have said, and we shall do so.

Presiding Judge: I think that, if the courier can be ready on Monday, I hope this will be approved by all the required authorities, namely first of all this Court and thereafter the Courts Administration and our Foreign Office. Regarding the additional applications which were submitted by Dr. Servatius - numbers 5-7 which were submitted this morning, and numbers 8, 9 and 10 which were submitted at noon - are you ready to reply to these applications at this stage?

Attorney General: On a few of them, yes, but on some I must ask for time, Your Honour. In regard to the last ones to reach me - Otto Winkelmann, Erich von dem Bach- Zelewski, and Dr. Edmund Veesenmayer, I am able to state that, in our opinion, the three are criminals. Winkelmann, according to what is said in the application itself, was the Senior Commander of the SS and Police Commander in Hungary, and we have no doubt that he was a party to the Accused's crimes in connection with Hungarian Jewry and the holocaust there. Veesenmayer was the German ambassador in Budapest. In our view he was one of those who instigated the German authorities to enter Hungary, so that, inter alia, he might harness the Hungarians, too, to the destruction of the Jewish people.

Also from the questionnaire it appears, and this is what the Accused seeks to prove, that the instructions to deport the Hungarian Jews were issued by Veesenmayer. This is what Defence Counsel wants to hear from Veesenmayer. This is one of the purposes of the examination. And even though I do not agree with this generalized statement, yet I have no doubt that in my view Veesenmayer is guilty of crimes against the Jewish people. Von dem Bach-Zelewski was the commander of an Einsatzgruppe and he murdered Jews. According to what is stated in the application, he is in gaol in Germany, and naturally I also cannot agree to his being brought here, and even if I agreed, it would be an empty gesture since he is in gaol this is what it says in this application.

Presiding Judge: Theoretically, this does not rule it out.

Attorney General: In order not to evade the subject, I want to make it known that these three, if they enter the State of Israel, will be arrested and will be brought to trial under the Nazis and Nazi Collaborators (Punishment) Law of 5720-1950. At the same time I agree that if the three are able to give evidence which is relevant to the offences ascribed to the Accused, it concerns the questions at issue. Consequently I shall request the Court to deal with them in the same way as it dealt with the first four.

Presiding Judge: And when will you be able to submit your questionnaire in regard to these?

Attorney General: By whatever time the Court may decide.

We ask for a short extension of time - until Tuesday.

Presiding Judge: Until Tuesday?

Attorney General: We shall try to do so by then.

Presiding Judge: Very well.

Attorney General: As far as the middle application is concerned - that is to say, we have now dealt with the first and the last - I can say the following: Baer is in gaol. He was the last commander of Auschwitz, and he is an offender against the Jewish people. What I said about the others applies to him as well. I would ask for a short time to reply on the subject of Huppenkothen and Hoettl. I shall be ready to give my answer by Monday morning.

Dr. Servatius: I have not yet formally submitted my application at the Session here. I now do so.

Judge Raveh: Is the address of Huppenkothen sufficient in order to summon him? It says here Muehlheim an der Ruhr. Is that sufficient?

Dr. Servatius: I believe that the address has been determined meanwhile in greater detail, and if not - I shall transmit this directly to the judicial authorities in Muehlheim on the river Ruhr, after obtaining his address through the local Office of Population Registration.

Presiding Judge:


We decide, in regard to the applications of Defence Counsel, to hear the evidence of the witnesses Winkelmann, Veesenmayer, von dem Bach-Zelewski and Baer, in the same manner as we decided in our Decision No. 14 concerning Six, Merten and Krumey, and for the same reasons as were given there. The Attorney General will hand in his questionnaires regarding these witnesses by next Tuesday at noon.

We have received another application. I do not know whether it is an application - yes, an application by Defence Counsel relating to the manner of summing up. I do not know whether you have transmitted a copy of this.

Attorney General: Yes - I received it during the adjournment. But I think it is too early to consider the question.

Presiding Judge: Yes, it is in fact early, but I do not know whether to take a positive decision on it. It would perhaps be as well for Dr. Servatius to know about it before the end of the evidence stage. He may possibly want to work on it.

Attorney General: Perhaps the Court would be good enough to arrange a meeting - this could also be done in chambers there is no need to discuss it in public.

Presiding Judge: Next week - please go into the matter.

Attorney General: Meanwhile a witness has arrived and I would ask the Court to summon him.

[ Previous | Index | Next ] [an error occurred while processing this directive]