Judgment 62, Eichmann Adolf

204. We hold that, according to the language of the Law in
question, the plunder of property may be considered an
inhuman act within the meaning of the definition of “crime
against humanity” only if it is committed under the pressure
of mass terror against any civilian population, or if it is
linked to any of the other acts of violence defined by the
Law as a crime against humanity, or as a result of any of
those acts, i.e., murder, extermination, starvation, or
deportation of any civilian population, so that the plunder
is only part of a general process, by way of “Hast thou
killed (or expelled) and also taken possession?” Hence, the
plunder of the property of the Jews of Austria and of their
institutions, through the Centres for Jewish Emigration – in
the organization of which the Accused played a leading role
– must be regarded as a crime against humanity in which the
Accused participated, because it was carried out by means of
terror against the Jews as a group. As to the plundering of
the property of the Jews who were expelled from the Reich by
way of forced emigration, this was an inseparable part of
the procedure of expulsion itself (section 64). The same
applies to the confiscation of the property of the Jews of
the Protectorate and of their institutions, through the
Central Office for Jewish Emigration in Prague, set up and
administered by the Accused (section 66), as well as in
connection with the property of the Jews of Germany and of
their institutions, and from the commencement of operation
of the Central Office for Jewish Emigration in Berlin in
which the Accused was active from the time it was first set
up in 1939 (section 65). The methods used in the Centres in
Vienna and Prague were duplicated by the Accused in Berlin;
and in Germany Jews also lived in a state of mass terror.
This terror began immediately on Hitler’s coming to power
and gained intensity as from the events of Crystal Night.
Under pressure of the threat of continued acts of violence
and of deportation to concentration camps, the Jews
endeavoured to save their lives and surrendered their
property to the Reich, in exchange for permission to
emigrate. This, too, applies not only to the private
property of individuals, but also to the property of Jewish
institutions which were made over to the Reich Association
of Jews in Germany, and upon the liquidation of the
Association, this property also was finally lost (section

205. What has been said applies with even greater force to
the Jews who were deported during the second stage, like the
Jews of areas annexed to the Reich (the Warthe district,
etc.) who were deported and whose property was transferred
simultaneously with the deportation to the “Trustreeship
Office East” (section 73); and later, at the final stage, in
connection with the property of those deported from the
Reich towards the East, whose property was stolen from them
during the deportation by the many devices described above,
such as the “contributions” to Special Account W and money
ostensibly paid for the acquisition of housing at Terezin
(sections 85, 90(c), 91, 96(a)). The same is true of all
the Jews of European countries who were expelled from their
homes and sent to the East. It makes no difference whether
the property of these Jews fell into the hands of the
Germans themselves, or whether it was left in the hands of
the satellite governments of the victims’ home countries, in
accordance with “the territorial principle,” which had been
invented for this purpose (T/194; T/195). The Accused
participated in the plunder of the property of all these, by
the very act of deporting the victims, which was invariably
connected with the confiscation of their property. For
example, although it has not been proved that the Accused
participated in organizing the special Rosenberg Unit which
plundered the property of the Jews in the countries of
Western Europe (sections 100, 101), he, too, is responsible
for this plunder, since by deporting the Jews he made it
possible for this Unit to carry out its task. And finally,
the luggage and personal belongings of the deportees, which
were taken from them on their arrival at the extermination
and other camps (including the Aktion Reinhard in
Globocnik’s camps), and the abomination of desecrating the
corpses by the extraction of their teeth and the cutting off
of the hair from the women’s heads – in all these the
Accused had a hand, since he was responsible for bringing
the victims to the camps where the acts were committed, with
the knowledge that these acts would be committed.

206. In the eighth count, the Accused is charged with a war
crime, in that during World War II in Germany and other Axis
states, and in areas occupied by them, together with others,
he caused the persecution, deportation and murder of the
Jewish population of the countries occupied by Germany and
by other countries of the Axis. All acts of persecution,
deportation and murder in which the Accused took part, as we
have found in discussing crimes against the Jewish People
and against humanity, also constitute war crimes within the
meaning of Section 1(a)(3) of the Law, as far as they were
committed during World War II, and the Jews who were the
victims of these acts belonged to the population of the
countries conquered by Germany and by other Axis countries.
Hence, unless there is a justification for these acts of
his, the Accused will be convicted also on the charge of war
crimes according to the eighth count.

Ninth to Twelfth Counts

207. The ninth count of the indictment charges the Accused
with a crime against humanity committed against over half a
million Polish civilians. The period is between 1940 and
1942, and the act – deportation of Poles from their places
of residence, with intention of settling German families in
those places. The methods of deportation are described in
the indictment as follows: (a) The transfer to Germany and
to German-occupied areas for the purpose of their employment
under conditions of servitude, coercion and terror; (b)
abandonment in other regions of Poland and German-occupied
areas in the East; (c) concentration in labour camps under
inhumane conditions; (d) transfer to Germany for the purpose
of “Germanization.”

Counsel for the Defence argued that the Poles were not
deported, but that they were “resettled” in a way which does
not constitute a crime. Let us, therefore, examine the
nature of the activities mentioned in this count of the
indictment. Almost all the proof is documentary, except the
evidence of the Accused and that of the witness Krumey
(taken in Germany), a number of excerpts from the statement
by Hoess, and the evidence of Rajewsky at the trial of Hoess
in Poland (T/1356).

The Accused’s activities are connected with two separate
waves of deportation of the population: (a) The transfer of
Poles from the Warthe district to the Generalgouvernement
area, viz., from West to East; (b) the transfer of Poles
from the Zamosc district to the West. The first wave began
at the end of 1939 and continued until 1943; the second
began at the end of 1942 and continued, as far as we know,
for a number of months.

208. We shall now consider first the transfer of the
population from the West to the East.

The basis was laid by Heydrich, at a meeting held on 21
September 1939 (T/164), with the participation of the
Accused. We have mentioned this meeting in another context,
and now the parts which refer to the Poles must be
emphasized, and we shall quote them in detail, because in
those parts of Heydrich’s speech lies the answer to the
above argument put forward by the Defence. The Accused was
present at the meeting, and therefore learned not only what
was the plan at the time as far as the Jews were concerned,
but also what was in store for the Poles. And this is what
Heydrich said about the Poles:

“About the development of former Poland, the trend of
thought is that the former German districts will become
German, and, in addition, a foreign language district will
be set up, with Cracow at its capital… The solution of the
Polish problem, as has been repeatedly explained, will be
carried out by distinguishing between the stratum of leaders
(Polish intelligentsia) and the lowest stratum, that of the
labourers. Of the political leaders in the occupied
territories, at the most three per cent have remained.
These three per cent must also be rendered harmless, and
they will be brought to concentration camps. The Operations
Units will prepare lists of outstanding leaders, and also
lists of the middle class of teachers, clergy, nobility,
legionnaires, returning officers, etc. These, too, are to
be arrested and moved into the remaining area. The care of
the souls of the Poles, will be placed in the hands of
Catholic priests from the West, but these will not be
allowed to speak Polish. Primitive Poles will be included
in the labour forces as migratory labourers, and in time
they will be evacuated from the German areas into the
foreign language area… Commanders of Operations
Units…must weigh how, on the one hand, the primitive Poles
could be included within the framework of labour, and how,
at the same time, to evacuate them. The aim is: The Pole is
to remain a seasonal labourer – the eternal wanderer. His
permanent place of residence must be in the vicinity of

Anyone who listened to this speech and plan, and later
participated in any form whatsoever in the operation of
uprooting the Polish population, could in no way argue that
this was an innocent operation of “resettlement.” This was
plain and simple expulsion, accompanied by degradation of
the people, and with malicious intent, especially against
the educated class.

The leadership of this campaign was entrusted to Himmler, as
the “Reichsfuehrer for the Strengthening of the German
people” (T/167). On 30 October 1939, he draws up the plan
for the period until 1940: All Congress Poles must be
evacuated from the Danzig – Western Prussia area, and also a
certain number of “especially hostile” Poles (T/169) from
other areas annexed to the Reich. The implementation of the
evacuation was assigned to the Security Police (N/8), and on
21 December 1939, the Accused’s activity begins (T/170).
Heydrich announces:

“For practical reasons, centralized treatment of
Security Police matters connected with the evacuation
of the Eastern Territories becomes necessary. As my
special Referent in the Head Office for Reich Security,
Department IV, I have appointed Hauptsturmfuehrer

The Accused alleges and testifies that here, too, his action
was limited to obtaining the trains. In fact, this
admission is sufficient to convict him of complicity in the
deportation of a civilian population according to the plan
of which he had knowledge as early as 21 September 1939; for
by this act alone, the Accused already made himself guilty
of a crime against humanity, within the meaning of Section
1(a)(2) of the Law. But after studying the documents, we
have come to the conclusion that his claim and his evidence
in this matter, are not in accordance with the truth. It
becomes clear that the Accused and his section co-ordinated
the deportations. We have already remarked – in connection
with the deportation of Jews during this period – that the
classification of the deported Poles was carried out by the
“Centres for the Change of Residence.” But the deportation
itself was in the hands of the Accused’s Section. We shall
quote a number of documents which prove this:

(a) On 4 October 1940 a meeting was presided over by the
Accused (T/171). The minutes of that meeting show that the
Accused co-ordinated the deportation operation. The tools
of implementation are “the section officials at the
Inspectors of the Security Police and the SD,” who are of
course subordinate to the RSHA. The co-ordination is
evident from the last part of the minutes:

“The Head Office for Reich Security, Department IV,
will put one assistant and one messenger at the
disposal of each Inspector of the Security Police and
the SD, for the preparation of the measures to be taken
during the deportation.”

(b) The memoranda of conversations held on 22 January 1940
and 23 January 1940 between the Accused and Seidl, one of
the officials of the Centre for the Change of Residence in
Poznan, also confirm the conclusion that they discussed not
only the timetable of transports, but also the class of
deportees (only “Congress Poles”).

(c) At a meeting held on 30 January 1940 (T/166), Heydrich
defined the Accused’s task as the “central direction of
deportation duties,” and also “to collect figures and
prepare deportation plans.” At this meeting, he announced
that some of the Polish labourers would be transferred to
Reich territory for agricultural work.

(d) The Accused deals with questions of how much money and
how much food deportees may take with them (T/211; T/1406),
and he demands a report on the technical execution of the
evacuation and the settlement of the Germans who are to come
in place of the evacuated Poles (T/1407).

The extent of the expulsions is revealed by the following
documents: T/362 shows that up to 15 November 1940 nearly
300,000 Polish deportees were transferred into the
Generalgouvernement area. T/361 shows that, from the
beginning of the operation until the end of 1943, over
530,000 Poles were deported. This includes the period up to
the end of 1939, before the Accused began to deal with
evacuations, and also the year 1943, which is not mentioned
in the indictment. After subtracting the number of those
deported in the years 1939 and 1943 (about 130,000 persons),
the remaining number of Poles, whose deportation the Accused
organized on behalf of the RSHA, is 400,000. However, it
seems that the lists attached to exhibit T/361 do not
include the Poles evacuated from Eastern Prussia, Upper
Eastern Silesia and Danzig-Western Prussia. These three
zones appear in list T/362, with 60,000 Polish deportees (up
to 15 November 1940).

Last-Modified: 1999/05/27