Justice Served?
An Opinion
Firstly, I agree with what has been stated under Victor's justice, about how it can be perceived as acts of injustices that people are charged with war crimes trials only and usually when their country loses the war. Thus, I do not find it acceptable that people who commit the same crimes are not charged depending on the country they are serving, when they have done equal harm to victims - each person should hold their own responsibility for the acts engaged in, and justice should be served to everyone in some form.
With that factor aside or in spite of it, and in my standpoint: I think that the Nuremberg and Tokyo war crimes tribunals were just and reasonable. This is because I believe that the war criminals were punished with principled, disciplinary proceedings in order to "deter the commission of crimes against humanity in the future." It was held as a prevention, and crucially contributed to the development and establishment of international criminal law. Until the early 1990s, it stood as the 'only examples' of international crimes tribunals for several decades, but since then - a structural approach to handle and control the concept of war crimes have now been initiated, where guilty and charged defendants have undertaken criminal responsibility for their committed war crimes acts. After World War II for instance, several Americans were tried for war crimes during the Vietnam conflict.
This is an example of what it would have been like, back then [according to BBC]:
I think that the situation has improved since then.
I think that the situation has improved since then.
More Information: |