The Nizkor Project: Remembering the Holocaust (Shoah)

Shofar FTP Archive File: imt/tgmwc/tgmwc-20/tgmwc-20-193.08

Archive/File: imt/tgmwc/tgmwc-20/tgmwc-20-193.08
Last-Modified: 2000/11/05

M. MONNERAY: Mr. President, I wanted to ask this witness
questions on both documents to show how little faith one can
attach to his depositions, since he declared before the
Commission that it concerned a very exceptional case;
whereas, as a matter of fact, it seems that it was a general
measure of the SD, which was in force in many different
parts of Germany.

THE PRESIDENT: If you want to cross-examine the witness as
to the document, you can put questions from the document to
him, but you cannot--at least the Tribunal does not want you
to put the document to him.


Q. Witness, you told us, concerning wireless, that the SD
furnished also very objective reports without any political
intentions behind them, is that right?

A. Yes. Every week we sent in reports about the reception of
radio programmes by the German population, as objectively as
possible, including all critical opinion.

M. MONNERAY: I have submitted to the Tribunal a Document PS-
3575, already produced in evidence as Exhibit USA 158, which
established that in this domain also the SD had a mission
which was not merely objective reporting.


Q. Witness, what was the work of Office III-B-3?

A. I cannot answer from memory as I no longer have the
individual department in my head; in any case, certainly not
with radio as that was the task of Amt III-C-4.

Q. Is it right to say that they looked after questions
concerning race and health?

A. I answered just now that I no longer remember the duties
of that office.

Q. Did you have anything to do with or did you receive
reports through your colleagues about general situation
reports concerning foreign workers in Germany?

A. No. I, personally, had nothing to do with these matters.
The question was quite beyond the scope of my duties.

M. MONNERAY: I should like to show to the Tribunal Document
1753-PS, which becomes Exhibit RF 1542, and which contains a
report from one of the departments of the SD concerning the
possibility given by the RSHA to German doctors to practise
abortion on female workers from the East, if they requested

                                                  [Page 228]

This report establishes that the statements of the SD in
this matter are in no way objective statements, but that
they definitely take a favourable view of the official
policy of the Nazi State.

I submit another Document, PS-1298, which becomes Exhibit RF
1543, concerning slave labour by workers in Germany. In this
document the person who wrote the report, who was an agent
of the SD, after having mentioned the numerous desertions of
foreign workers, recommends practical measures, such as
reprisals against relatives by withdrawal of ration cards,
and so forth.

Q. Witness, you call those objective reports which do not of
themselves support the policy of the police, do you not?

A. Yes, for this is a report of one of the many subsidiary
offices which existed under the Reichssicherheitshauptamt in
order to obtain a cross-section of public opinion in which,
of course, the opinions of members of the Party would also
be represented.

Moreover, I would like definitely to refute the assertion of
the Prosecutor that it involved any agent of the SD. Amt III
was never concerned with this matter, nor had any agents in
the home information department, as I already stated this
morning. I must again state that concerning the technical
questions which are contained in these documents, I can only
take a subjective attitude because they did not belong to my
department. I still maintain my fundamental declaration
concerning the duties of the SD, even in the face of these

Q. But, witness, this document was not addressed to the RSHA
to be centralised; it was addressed to the office for the
utilization of manpower. It is therefore a report in view of
the execution of those treasures which are suggested, is
that not so?

A. From the document which I have before me, it is not
evident from what SD office it came.

Q. I am going to show you a photostatic copy of this report.

A. This also does not indicate in any way from which SD
office the document was sent.

Q. Do you admit that the report is addressed to the Manpower
Commitment Office?

A. Yes; but at the same time I would like to point out that
under the signature it says, "Secretary": and the SD, as far
as I know, never had any secretaries. There should be a SD
or a SS rank shown there.

Q. And there is also written in the same document: "I am
sending you herewith a copy of the report from the Inland

A. Yes.

Q. In the occupied territories, the SD was represented by
organizations under Amt III and Amt VI, is that not so?

A. No, Amt III - here again I can speak only of Amt III -
had no organizations which were directly subordinate to it,
but only individual SD agents of Amt III who carried out the
specific SD tasks in the occupied territories.

Q. Amt VI of the RSHA looked after the SD abroad, did it

A. Yes.

Q. And it had its representatives within the German police
organizations operating abroad, did it not?

A. About this I can say nothing because I never worked in
that office.

M. MONNERAY: I offer to the Tribunal in evidence Documents F-
973 and F-974. Those are information sheets addressed to
Section 6-ST-2. The two documents will become Exhibits RF
1544 and 1545. Those are information sheets and agents'
reports addressed by the office.

THE PRESIDENT: Go on. Have they been translated? Have copies
been given to the German counsel?

                                                  [Page 229]

M. MONNERAY: It has not been given to the interpreters
because I am not going to read the whole document. The
original is in German.

It is a report made out on a printed information form, sent
out by the SD agents to the competent services of the
Gestapo, concerning the Jewish question; and thereby the
relations existing between the two offices can be
established, contrary to the statements of the witness.

THE PRESIDENT: Have these documents been translated into the
various languages?

M. MONNERAY: Only into French, Mr. President.

THE PRESIDENT: Well, you know the rule is that they must be
translated into four languages. You must read it then, if
that is so.

M. MONNERAY: With the permission of the Tribunal, I shall
read only one of the two documents, Section 6-N-I.

THE PRESIDENT: M. Monneray, we have been a long time, and we
have now apparently got to the stage that we have got to
read this document, all these documents, which are of very
remote importance. We have got to read them through because
they have not been translated. It is taking up a long time;
and it does not seem to be achieving any great result.

M. MONNERAY: Mr. President, I shall pass directly to the
last point, concerning the transplanting of population.

Q. Do you know, witness, if the SD participated with the
Gestapo in sending people into concentration camps?

A. I cannot say. From my personal knowledge, I can only say
in general that Amt III had no executive duties at all.
Also, therefore, it was not empowered to send any people
into a concentration camp.

Q. Do you know that the SD collaborated with the Gestapo to
check which Poles were capable of being Germanised and which
of them, on the other hand, should be sent to concentration

A. No, I have no factual knowledge of any of these

M. MONNERAY: I would ask permission merely to read an
extract of document R-112.

THE PRESIDENT: Is this new?

M. MONNERAY: It is a document which has already been offered
in evidence, Exhibit USA 309.

THE PRESIDENT: Then you must not refer to it because the
witness says he does not know anything about it.

M. MONNERAY: I would like merely to read the passage from
this document which establishes, contrary to the statements
of the witness, who does not know these facts, that the SD
did in fact collaborate with the Gestapo in selecting Poles
to be Germanised.

THE PRESIDENT: If there is anything in the document which
shows that the witness is not telling the truth you can put
that part of the document to the witness.

M. MONNERAY: The document refers to Amt III B of the SD and
does not indicate any element which directly affects the
witness. Therefore, it bears only on the general question of
the activity of the SD and does not affect the witness

THE PRESIDENT: M. Monneray, the witness has just said that
Amt III did not have anything to do with deportation of
populations. If this document shows that he did, then you
can put that fact to him.

M. MONNERAY: That is why, Mr. President, I was asking
permission to read a passage of this document.

                                                  [Page 230]

THE PRESIDENT: You can put the document to him.

M . MONNERAY: It is a letter of the 1st July, signed by
Streckenbach. It emanates from Amt III B (1) and it is
addressed to the Gestapo, office of the SD, in the newly
occupied territories of the East. This document says, on
Page 2, first point:

  "The Gestapo Services must immediately ask the branch
  offices of the DVL, the SD departments and the Kripo
  departments for all available material on persons
  belonging to Group 4."

Third point: "The office chiefs of the State Police offices
and the leaders of the SD offices, or their permanent
representatives (B-agents in SD III) must participate in the
racial examinations in order to see for themselves the
people involved."

On Page 3, fourth point:

  "After the selection, from the racial point of view, the
  chiefs of the State Police offices and the leaders of the
  SD departments, or their permanent representatives (B-
  agents in SD III) will verify in common (this is
  underlined in the document) the material available, and
  will if necessary ask the RSHA, Amt IV C2, for arrest and
  consignment to a concentration camp. In particularly
  difficult cases the documentary files will first of all
  have to be sent to the RSHA; Amt III B."

On Page 4, the last paragraph of this order, signed by

  "In execution of the current control of Germanisation, the
  SD services in the old Reich territory - "

THE PRESIDENT: One moment. As far as I understand the
document it clearly applies to Amt III. Well, why do you not
put it to him?

M. MONNERAY: I should like to ask the witness afterwards if
he still maintains that Amt III had nothing to do with the
Gestapo and had no authority to carry out arrests and send
people to concentration camps.

First of all, I would like to finish reading the last

THE PRESIDENT: All right, go on.

  Q. " ... the SD services in Reich territory proper will
  carry on in a similar manner with the supervision of and
  reporting on Poles capable of being Germanised; they
  should afford all assistance to the 'advisers' on

The report is signed Streckenbach.


Q. Witness, this order really emanates from Amt III of the
RSHA, does it not?

A. Apparently some mistake has occurred, Mr. Prosecutor,
because according to the document before me, the document
does not come from the RSHA at all, but from the Reich
Commissioner for Germanisation. After the date of 1st July,
1942, there is III B (I), it is true, but it has the
letterhead "Reich Commissioner for the Establishment of
Germanisation," an office which is completely separated from
the RSHA.

Q. Well, then, witness, is it correct to say that according
to this order signed by Streckenbach, the services of the
SD, in common with those of the Gestapo, were to check their
files and to request, if necessary, the arrest of people
concerned and have them sent to concentration camps? Will
you please answer yes or no?

A. Unfortunately from my own experience I can give no
information about that. In any case it is clear that the
Reich Commissioner for Germanisation could give no orders to
the SD, Amt III. Therefore, one remains quite vague, from
this document, as to what the SD did in practice in this
matter, and the specialist concerned should be questioned

                                                  [Page 231]

Q. You did not answer the question. According to this text,
is it correct to state that the SD actively collaborated
with the Gestapo in these matters.

A. I believe -

Q. Yes or no?

A. I cannot answer the question with yes or no, but I think
I have already answered it when I said that the Reich
Commissioner for Germanisation could give no orders to the
SD. I cannot judge therefore what the SD actually did, as
these are two entirely different offices. As far as I know
the competent Gruppenleiter has already been heard before
the Commission.

Q. You are still not answering the question. Is it true, yes
or no, that according to this text the SD collaborated with
the Gestapo in examining people and, if necessary, had them
arrested and sent to concentration camps?

A. Unfortunately I must again repeat my answer to your
second question. Since the Reich Commissioner could give no
direct orders to the SD I cannot answer by yes or no as to
whether the SD, on the basis of this order by the Reich
Commissioner, actually collaborated with the Gestapo. And
that is the question.

THE PRESIDENT: I think the document speaks for itself and
now I think the Tribunal had better adjourn.

(A recess was taken.)


Q. One last question, witness, concerning this document. Who
helped the "Reich Commissioner for the Consolidation of

A. I did not quite understand the question.

(Question repeated.)

A. That was a supreme office.

Q. Which was under the authority of the chief of the SS, and
the chief of the German Police, is that not true?

A. Himmler.

Q. You maintain that this letter of 1st July, which came
from Himmler's offices and was addressed at the same time to
the Gestapo office, the SD office, and the Criminal Police
office, does not correspond with the real state of affairs.

A. From my own knowledge I can only point out once more that
there are two completely different agencies concerned. To
what extent the formulation of the document coincides with
the actual work of the SD, I cannot, I repeat, judge from my
own knowledge.

M. MONNERAY: I have no more questions to ask.

THE PRESIDENT: Dr. Gawlik - wait a minute.

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.