The Nizkor Project: Remembering the Holocaust (Shoah)

The Trial of Adolf Eichmann
Session 38
(Part 10 of 10)

Judge Halevi: Globke was in the Ministry of the Interior?

State Attorney Bar-Or: He was in the Ministry of the Interior. He worked in the office of Stuckart.

Judge Halevi: Who was Stuckart?

State Attorney Bar-Or: Stuckart was the director of Jewish affairs in the police, and such a position of Referent also existed, in fact, in the Ministry of the Interior, despite the fact that the police formally belonged to the Ministry of the Interior. In Stuckart's office, they handled Jewish affairs in Germany. They obviously gave legal advice, in the main.

Judge Halevi: Here the name Duckart is mentioned. Is this, perhaps, an error?

State Attorney Bar-Or: I do not think that this is an error, since Stuckart was Dr. Globke's superior. If it was Stuckart and not Duckart, they would have mentioned his name before. I should like to quote those sentences, and I shall read them in the original, for they are rather complicated for me.

Presiding Judge: Is there no translation?

State Attorney Bar-Or: I am very sorry - I have not been furnished with a translation. I shall not read much, only the most important passages.

The survey on the first page is about the effects of the Nuremberg laws concerning citizenship within the domain of the Reich. Afterwards, at the end of the page, it says: "In principle only those who belong to the German people will be permitted in future to be nationals (Staatsangehoerige)."

In the middle of page four we read:

"Nevertheless, if we convert those belonging to foreign nationalities, however close to us from the point of race, but who cannot be included in the body of the nation, to be protected subjects only, in other words, if we remove them by such action from the compass of German citizenship - then it is inadmissible that German nationality should be preserved for the Jews who are of a foreign race. As a result of this, as was conveyed in a letter dated 9.12.1940 with the mark Ie 5637/40-4016, a draft regulation was sent for the Law of Reich Citizenship, which laid down that the Jews would also be converted into protected subjects."
Here we see the first signs of Regulation 11.

I now continue at the end of the page:

"Therefore, the Reich Ministry of Justice* {*Reich Ministry of the Interior} in keeping with these remarks, after cancelling the previous draft, proposes the denial of German nationality to all Jews holding German nationality, both at home and abroad, so as to convert them into stateless persons."
Afterwards it goes on to say that they were seeking to exempt from this general principle only those Jews who were cohabiting in mixed marriages, having special rights, "privilegierte Mischehe."

At the bottom of the page, it says:

"The representative of the Head Office for Reich Security sought that the deprivation of German citizenship should embrace Jews cohabiting in mixed marriages and enjoying privileged status." On page six, at the end, it says:

"After that a discussion took place about the handling of the property of Jews living abroad.... On this issue the chairman explained that the draft contemplated the expropriation of the property in a single act (uno actu), and that the regulations regarding the implementation of the expropriation or the forfeiture, and the limitation of responsibility, were worked out mainly along the lines of the procedure laid down in the Law for the Deprivation of Citizenship, 1933."

One more sentence:
"The representatives of the Fuehrer's deputy and the Head Office for Reich Security agreed to the basic principle, to the fundamental idea of the draft."
The Court will find the draft annexed to the document. We are submitting this document, not only because representatives of the Accused participated, but because we especially stress the manner of discussion and the discretionary power which is evident here, and which apparently was, at all events, exercised by each of the participants.

I pass to document No. 1061, the Accused's letter to Luther of the Foreign Ministry, dated 17.2.41, concerning a certain Jew named Gustav Israel Fulder. He applied to send to his mother, who was in the unoccupied zone of France, some articles which were very much needed by her, mainly clothing. Here we have one of those cases of a son who was left behind, and his mother who was sent to unoccupied France. It says here that "for reasons of principle" - states Eichmann - "I am not able to comply with this request, and especially in view of the fact that, if I were to respond, I would encourage a multiplication of applications of this sort."

Presiding Judge: T/677.

State Attorney Bar-Or: I come now to Prosecution document No. 910. It was shown to the Accused, and so it is marked, with the evidence of Mr. Less in T/37(285), and the Accused expresses his views on this document on pages 3367 to 3370 of his statement. This is the Accused's letter dated 12 March 1941 to Rademacher, about the treatment of Jews possessing foreign nationality.

Presiding Judge: T/678.

State Attorney Bar-Or: It says here, at the end: "The treatment of Jews having foreign nationality, other than Soviet or United States nationality, should be equivalent to the treatment of Jews holding German nationality or who are stateless, according to a notification from there." There are some marginal notes here, initialled by Rademacher. He writes on page one: "It was discussed with Eichmann that no reply should be given yet, but rather that it should first be checked with the Foreign Ministry whether not all (the special arrangements?) for foreign Jews can be cancelled." Apparently, there was a discussion here of the special procedures for foreign Jews, which were still applicable to those who were living in the area of the Reich, as to whether the time had not come for these to be cancelled as well.

Prosecution document 66 - was shown to the Accused and was marked T/37(20). The Accused discusses this subject particularly on pages 1650-1656. This is the Accused's letter, again to Rademacher, dated 12 March 1941 regarding Italian entry visas for German Jews who are in Yugoslavia. And here it says that, in referring to the Foreign Ministry's letter dated 6 March 1941:

"I (the Accused) advise that, bearing in mind the Final Solution of the Jewish Question which will come about in the future (he writes this in March 1941), there is no point from now on in continuing the emigration of Jews who possess German nationality and are present in Yugoslavia."
Finally, he quotes Goering: "The Reichsmarschall of the Greater German Reich requests that there be increased emigration of Jews, even in wartime, within the framework of the existing possibilities." Again, as if this were a policy to encourage emigration from the Reich, so that such possibilities should not be exploited by those Jews who have already succeeded in leaving the Reich.

Presiding Judge: There seems to be a contradiction here.

State Attorney Bar-Or: It seems, as it were, a contradiction. The truth is that Eichmann is not interested in providing the possibility of emigration to Jews who are already abroad, for example in Yugoslavia, for they use up visas to America on account of the German quota. Where a Jew with German nationality residing in Belgrade received an entry visa into the United States, this came off the American quota for this region. Eichmann could have exploited this quota for people who had not managed to get out of the Reich itself. That man, whose case is being considered here, is no longer inside the Reich - he is already in Yugoslavia. This is the interpretation of the last part.

Judge Halevi: But what was the Final Solution to come about in the future?

State Attorney Bar-Or: We already heard of this in 1938 in the Accused's letters. The Final Solution in this context is the expulsion of the Jews not only from the area under the control of the Reich.

Judge Halevi: But expulsion, not extermination.

State Attorney Bar-Or: According to this letter, I do not see any possibility of contending that there is talk here of anything more than the expulsion of the Jews from Europe. This was in March 1941.

Presiding Judge: This will be marked T/679.

State Attorney Bar-Or: Thank you, Your Honour.

I now pass to our document 1062, the Accused's letter to Rademacher of 21 March 1941. Incidentally, in this context I would like to draw the Court's attention to the file mark. We have already come across this - IVB4b (neu). The word neu (new) comes in consequence of the change-over from IVD4 to IVB4 which was quite recent - it came about in January of that year. For some time, we shall find the word neu on the Accused's files.

Here the reference is to a dispatch of foodstuffs to the Jews who had been deported from Baden and Saarpfalz to unoccupied France. Again this is, in fact, a document containing a reply to a question which Defence Counsel raised a little while ago.

Here it says, at the end: "In view of the fact that, giving due consideration to the economic war needs, I am unable to agree to any case of dispatching foodstuffs, textiles or money to Jews deported to unoccupied France, for whose maintenance, incidentally, Jewish welfare organizations ought to provide. I ask you, in future, to reject such requests directly, that is to say, without finding it necessary to refer to me." The matter discussed here were four applications which reached the Accused through the Foreign Ministry.

Presiding Judge: This will be marked T/680.

State Attorney Bar-Or: I pass to document No. 1444. This document is important, seeing that it provides this Honourable Court with an explanation of the method of signing in regard to various matters with which the Accused was connected. The question as to what, in fact, was the position of the Reichssicherheitshauptamt within the set-up of the Ministry of the Interior, and when was anyone at all entitled to sign on behalf of the Ministry of the Interior - this question is solved also by this document. The Accused writes here under the heading "Minister of the Interior" (Der Reichsminister des Innern).

This matter, in fact, does not concern the Reichssicherheitshauptamt at all. I have already submitted to the Court the law on which he relies, which authorizes only two persons - it authorizes the Minister of the Interior and the Minister for Church Affairs, not the police and not the Reichssicherheitshauptamt. And there, indeed, according to the directives of 1936, which have already been submitted to the Court, we find Pol.S. as it should be, if it was issued on behalf of the Ministry of the Interior IVB4, and again with neu in brackets; we also find here the marking RV - Reichsvereinigung.

These matters relate to the Reichsvereinigung, since in this document Eichmann gives orders for the transfer of the property of all the Jewish communities in the district of Karlsruhe, Mannheim, etc. in the region of Baden, to the Reichsvereinigung, under the directives which I have already submitted to the Court. He says:

"By virtue of section 5 of Regulation 10 of the Law of German Citizenship of 4 July 1939, I hereby order, with the approval of the Honourable Minister for Church Affairs, the inclusion of all the communities specified in the annexure in the Reich Association of the Jews in Germany."
Incidentally, this document, from a historical point of view, also has some relevance for another reason. We obtained it, together with a notarial certificate from Berlin of 1942. This, in fact, is not the original. But those in Karlsruhe, who were obliged to deal with the transfer of property, mainly immovable, in the records of the Jewish communities at Karlsruhe to the Reich Association of the Jews in Germany, according to the instructions of the Gestapo, had to have an official copy in order to implement it. They obtained it from Berlin through a notary on 5 March 1942.

Presiding Judge: This will be marked T/681.

State Attorney Bar-Or: I now come to Prosecution document No. 197. This is a memorandum signed by Rademacher of the Foreign Ministry, dated 21 August 1941, about the question of what was to happen now with the requirement of wearing the badge of shame by Jews possessing German nationality. He says here:

"Sturmbannfuehrer Eichmann, of the Head Office for Reich Security, telephoned me and told me confidentially that SS Gruppenfuehrer Heydrich had received a telegram from the Fuehrer's main headquarters, according to which the Fuehrer had agreed that the Jews of Germany should wear a mark of identification.

"Eichmann wanted to know if it was possible to include foreign Jews. I answered that, in principle, foreign Jews had to be excluded, for there was a risk that in North America, for example, retaliatory measures would be taken, and German nationals would also be compelled to wear a mark of identification."

It seems to me that Rademacher deluded himself.

Presiding Judge: This was before the United States entered the War? Was it in August 1941?

State Attorney Bar-Or: Yes.

Presiding Judge: This will be marked T/682.

State Attorney Bar-Or: Thank you, Your Honour.

Next, document No. 1178. A letter from the Accused to the German Foreign Ministry, dated 28 August 1941, regarding transit visas through Reich territory for Jewish emigrants. And he says: "In reply to your letter of 19 August 1941, I hereby notify you that, from our point of view, Jewish emigration from areas which are occupied by us must be avoided, in view of the Final Solution of the question of European Jewry, which is now being formulated and is in its preparatory stage." Later on, at the end, he says: "For this reason we ask that, because of the considerations that have been mentioned, you, for your part, should also adopt a negative attitude towards the transit of Jewish emigrants who are presently in Denmark."

Here, Your Honour, he speaks of the solution of the Jewish Question in its real significance.

Presiding Judge: This was in August 1941, and this was actually to prevent emigration?

State Attorney Bar-Or: Yes. Here there is no longer the question of a quota - there is deportation from Germany, there is here the actual Final Solution of the question of European Jewry.

The Court will, naturally, take note of the date of this letter, August 1941, and of Goering's instructions which were given, precisely at that time, to prepare what was afterwards carried out at Wannsee.

Presiding Judge: This will be T/683.

State Attorney Bar-Or: Thank you, Your Honour. Now to document No. 948.

Presiding Judge: What was the previous document that mentioned the "Final Solution"?

State Attorney Bar-Or: Our document No. 666, which had been marked here T/679. Before the Court is our document No. 948, passed on to Luther, Unterstaatssekretaer (Undersecretary of State) in the Foreign Ministry. Here it says: "Ribbentrop, Foreign Minister of the Reich, asks you to inform Gruppenfuehrer Heydrich on the question of the marking of Jews possessing a non-German nationality, but residing in Germany, that Ribbentrop wants, for the time being, to reserve for himself the right to express an opinion on this issue for important reasons of foreign policy. He requests that nothing should be done, for the present, to impose the obligation of wearing the badge also on Jews of foreign nationality residing in Germany."

Presiding Judge: This will be marked T/684.

State Attorney Bar-Or: Now we have document No. 949. This is Heydrich's letter, dated 24 September 1941, which was sent out from the Accused's office. The Accused could not sign it, for it was addressed to the Foreign Minister himself. It nevertheless bears the marking Pol.S. IVB4b. Here Heydrich explains to the Foreign Minister: "In view of the fact that the Fuehrer has approved the designation of Jews, I have promulgated a suitable police regulation. Even though the question of the treatment of Jews having a foreign nationality has not been mentioned in the police regulation, these Jews are exempt, for the time being, from wearing the Jewish badge, by virtue of an internal instruction."

In fact the explanation means: This is a general instruction, it applies to every Jew. By means of an internal instruction which was given to Gestapo Leitstellen (regional head offices), Jews possessing foreign nationality were not bound, for the time being, to wear the badge. It appears that, as things developed, the obligation to wear the badge was imposed on them as well, without the necessity of having to enact a special provision.

Presiding Judge: This will be marked T/685.

We shall now adjourn. The next Session will be next Monday, at 9 a.m.

[ Previous | Index | Next ]

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.