Session 044-03, Eichmann Adolf

State Attorney Bar-Or: I shall only draw attention to one
passage on page 168, in which it says: “By order of the
Central Office for Jewish Emigration, Prague, the
designation obligation has been applied to Jews of
Slovakian, Romanian and Croatian nationality.” The Court
will certainly remember the Foreign Ministry document
presented yesterday which informs the Accused that these
three countries are ready to include their Jews in the area
of the Greater Reich and subject them to the anti-Jewish
measures in force in the Reich.

I pass on to document No. 1335, the Monthly Report for March
1942, which begins on page 174. It deals with a subject
about which the Court will hear detailed evidence today: The
evacuation of the homes of a large number of Jews in Prague,
and their concentration, not in a ghetto, but on the same
pattern which we saw yesterday in Vienna. It was done in
the same way in Prague: Concentration of the Jews in defined
and limited housing districts. At the end, on page 180, it
states that, as of 27 March 1942, all provincial Jewish
Religious Communities in the Protectorate of Bohemia and
Moravia are dissolved, i.e. by order of the Central Office
for Jewish Emigration, everything is now concentrated in
Prague itself.

Presiding Judge: This will be Exhibit T/828 (b).

State Attorney Bar-Or: I go on to document No. 1336, the
Monthly Report for June 1942. It begins on page 112, where
the Court will find information about the handing over to
the Gestapo of textiles, used clothing, and all other items
of clothing, the kind of operations which were carried out
in other parts of the Reich.

And, at the end, a subject which we shall find in greater
detail in another document: A short report about the
deportations from the Protectorate, or rather from Prague,
in June 1942. Here the transports are marked AAb, AAc, and
AAd from Kolin, AAh and AAe from Prague, and AAf and AAg
from Olmuetz. We shall find these markings also in the
general report which I shall soon submit.

Presiding Judge: This will be Exhibit T/829(a).

State Attorney Bar-Or: I proceed to document No. 1338, the
Monthly Report for July 1942, which begins on page 301.
More reporting about transports, about deportations, which
are marked according to the same system; mobilization of
Jews for assistance with these transports; a report about a
Jewish work centre – we shall hear about part of this topic
in connection with the Trusteeship Office from a witness who
will give evidence today; and finally – mobilization for
agricultural work.

Presiding Judge: This will be Exhibit T/830(a).

State Attorney Bar-Or: I pass on to document No. 1238 – a
letter from the Accused to the Foreign Ministry, dated 14
April 1943. The Accused informs the Foreign Ministry that,
in spite of the intervention of the Swedish authorities in
Berlin, once the Jewish members of the Bondi family have
entered Theresienstadt, they cannot be returned to Sweden.
On the other hand, he says, he has no objection to the
emigration of the sisters and brother Hanna, Ruth and
Siegfried Kalter to Sweden.

Presiding Judge: This will be Exhibit T/837.

State Attorney Bar-Or: I should like to direct the
attention of the Court to one sentence, which says: “I have
informed the Chief of the Security Police and the Security
Service at The Hague accordingly.”

I go on to document No. 1237. It is a report, not in the
usual form, from the Council of Elders of the Jews of Prague
to the Central Office, dated 19 June 1944. The report is
submitted at the order of SS Obersturmfuehrer Guennel, from
Brunner’s office, whom we shall meet again. It gives
details of the emigration by periods – until the outbreak of
the War, and emigration after July 1939. It gives details,
in particular, about the evidence the Court heard from
witnesses from Prague. It gives a very good breakdown of
all the forms, from no less than eleven different offices,
which every emigrant had to fill out for this purpose.
These were offices concentrated in the Central Office, which
one had to go through in order to obtain permission to

Presiding Judge: This will be Exhibit T/838.

Judge Halevi: Who signed this?

State Attorney Bar-Or: There is no signature on this
report. It only says: Council of Elders. Who signed – it
is not stated here. From the dictation marks, I cannot
state that. It says here: P 1/Eng. One cannot see who this
was. It concerns, in the end, transports which have
departed. In fact, since the date is so late, June 1944,
this report to Guenther’s office constitutes a very
convenient summary of activities of the Gestapo against the
Jews of the Protectorate.

I pass on to document No. 1196, again one of the statistical
tables, this time in geographic form, which the office of
the Community in Prague had to submit to Brunner’s office.
There are figures of Jews in each individual district here,
and a summary for 31 October 1943.

Presiding Judge: This will be marked T/839.

State Attorney Bar-Or: I proceed to document No. 1192, a
summary of the emigration of Jews and of transports of Jews
from the Protectorate sent to Brunner’s office on 19 June
1944. On the third page the Court will find a detailed list
of transports, which also mentions, among other things,
those markings which we found in the weekly reports. Each
transport is given its marking, its date, the place of
departure, and the number of Jews. Usually the number is
1,000, or around 1,000, Jews who were included in the

Presiding Judge: This will be marked T/840.

State Attorney Bar-Or: I may perhaps draw your attention to
the fact that the summary is dated 19 June 1944. It
mentions a total of 76,809 Jews. 7,000 were evacuated and
69,809 left (“abgewandert”). The detailed listing is to be
found among the documents which were attached to this

Before ending the chapter on the Protectorate, I should like
to revert to document No. 889. It is a letter from the
Commander of the Security Police and the Security Service in
Prague, of 20 May 1942. Since the Court will hear detailed
evidence on what it refers to, I should like to read part of
this letter. I shall read it in Hebrew, although the
particular flavour will not come through. I hope the Court
will compare the text with the original.

“Subject: The Central Office for Jewish Emigration, Prague.
Various offices have lately expressed opinions about the
Central Office for Jewish Emigration, Prague, which comes
under the Commander of the Security Police and the Security
Service, opinions which are likely to undermine the
prestige, the good name, of the Office, and hence of my
authority. Concerning this I should like to say the
“If it is made easy for the German inhabitants of
Prague, and especially for the officials and other
public service personnel, to obtain decent housing and,
in addition, to buy furniture at reasonable prices in
these times – the credit lies only with the Central
Office for Jewish Emigration. It seems that everybody
has forgotten what the conditions were in the Reich by
comparison. It is only as a result of the initiative
of the Central Office for Jewish Emigration that the
clandestine transfer of Jewish flats to Czechs was
avoided. No one could have reproached the Central
Office for Jewish Emigration if it had not taken
measures which thwarted these intentions of the Jews.
I need not emphasize that this tremendous task was
carried out meticulously and correctly, with the least
possible use of German forces. It is self-evident that
the Central Office for Jewish Emigration, being a
German authority, is ready to assist every fellow
German, but this must not be carried to the extreme
where this office is mistakenly considered as being a
department store or a real estate agency. With regard
to the disgusting incidents which are reported to me
time and again, I do not wish to examine in detail at
what time the most clamorous of these gentlemen became

“It is quite an unreasonable demand from the SS men –
who have the task, unpleasant in itself, to be
constantly concerned with the Jews – that they should
be abused by people from the tips of whose noses one
can see that only three years ago they were probably
sitting in one and the same cafe together with Jews.
May I request that more understanding be shown for the
work of the Central Office for Jewish Emigration.”

Dr. Servatius: I may perhaps observe that this is the
Commander of the Security Police, and it is here indicated
clearly that the Office for Jewish Emigration is under the
supervision and authority of the Commander of the Security
Police, i.e., not under Eichmann.

Judge Halevi: Who is this Boehme?

State Attorney Bar-Or: He is the Commander of the Security
Police and the Security Service. From the formal
administrative point of view, I do not dispute what was
stated by Counsel for the Defence.

Presiding Judge: This will be T/841.

State Attorney Bar-Or: The chapter of Czechoslovakia is now
ended. With your permission, I shall call the witness who
is to testify on this subject after the beginning of the
second part of the morning session.

I now proceed to documents connected with the Theresienstadt
camp. First I should like to ask Your Honours to permit me
to submit document No. 109, the examination by the police,
as well as the evidence before the People’s Court in Vienna,
of Dr. Siegfried Seidl, of October 1945. With the
establishment of Theresienstadt and the transfer of Jews
from Prague to the first work camp in Theresienstadt at the
end of 1941 and the beginning of 1942, Dr. Seidl was
appointed as the first commander of the camp.

Presiding Judge: Are you saying that this declaration is
dated October 1945?

State Attorney Bar-Or: Yes, this examination begins on 16
October 1945.

Judge Halevi: And this was before an Austrian People’s

State Attorney Bar-Or: It was partly before the State
Police of Vienna, and in the end before the People’s Court
in Vienna, the Volksgericht. Seidl was sentenced there.
The sentence was death, and it was carried out.

In this interrogation, Seidl testifies about himself and
about his accomplices, including the Accused. He reviews
the management of Theresienstadt Camp, reviews his activity
with the Einsatzkommando Eichmann in Hungary, to which he
was attached in the end following a meeting in Mauthausen,
and after this back to Vienna, where he directed the final
activities connected with the Ostwall* {*Should be the
Suedostwall (see: T/842, p. 51/34) – i.e., the South-Eastern
fortifications of the retreating German army.} together with
Krumey, in connection with the utilization of several
thousand persons who arrived in Austria from Hungary during
the final months, or rather the final weeks, in fact, before
the departure of the SS from Hungary. He was one of
Eichmann’s aides whom we have met – and shall meet again –
over a long period of time. His position as regards the
Centre, which we have dealt with, was similar to the
position of Wisliceny whose declarations the Court has
received. The Court will meet this Seidl again. We shall
meet him in the Polish chapter under Krumey’s command, and
we shall meet him when we move on to Yugoslavia and deal
with the expulsion of the Slovenes from Croatia.

His examination and his evidence seem to me to be most
relevant, their prima facie value seems to me not
unimportant, and I ask the Court in accordance with its
special authority to permit the submission of document No.

Dr. Servatius: I have no remarks concerning this matter.

Presiding Judge: Decision No. 35

We accept Seidl’s declarations as evidence, in accordance
with what is stated in our Decision No. 7.

State Attorney Bar-Or: Owing to the importance of this
document, I shall permit myself to draw the attention of the
Court to a number of points in it.

Presiding Judge: This will be marked T/842 – but within
limits, Mr. Bar-Or!

State Attorney Bar-Or: I have marked only the most
important passages for myself; I shall not go with you
through all the 34 pages of this record of the proceedings,
Your Honour.

Seidl relates that, on 1 November 1941, i.e., only three
weeks after the meeting in Prague of which we spoke this
morning, he took upon himself the direction of
Theresienstadt Camp. At the end of this passage he says
that, with short interruptions, about 110,000 persons were
brought to Theresienstadt, most of whom were sent on to the
East. This is at the end of the first page. On page 2 he
says that he beat some of the inmates of the camp. At the
end of the page, he speaks of an important event – which we
shall encounter again. Here we can hear him speaking about
this event. He talks about the punishing of special cases
in connection with bribery of officials and smuggling of
mail. At the end of the page he says that there was an
order, issued by Obersturmbannfuehrer Eichmann, that such
offences are punishable by death.

Presiding Judge: It says in German “o.a. Verstoesse.” What
does that mean?

State Attorney Bar-Or: It means “oben angefuehrte
Verstoesse” (above-mentioned offences), i.e., bribery of
officials and smuggling of mail. This may be a Viennese
custom, and Seidl was an Austrian. Or there may be certain
differences of style.

On page 3 he mentions the execution of sixteen persons in
Theresienstadt for the smuggling of mail, in accordance with
these orders by the Accused. He says that the executioner
of these death sentences was himself a Jew by the name of
Fischer. He tells of one case where the rope broke, and
this Jew was hanged again.

He relates that, at the beginning of July 1943, he left
Theresienstadt, and that then he became the first Commander
of Bergen-Belsen Camp. On 11 March 1944, he is called to
Mauthausen, and there he joins Einsatzkommando Eichmann and
goes to Hungary. I am referring to 4. Here he describes
how in March 1945 most of the Hungarian Jews who reached
Theresienstadt were in the end transferred from
Theresienstadt to Bergen-Belsen. He says, rather
laconically, that he heard about the fate of these Jews
only after the capitulation, but adds parenthetically that
most of them were liquidated in one way or another.

In another document – I am on page 2 of the second document
– Seidl names the persons with whom he mainly worked in
Theresienstadt. He mentions the Head of the Council of
Elders, Jacob Edelstein, and his deputy, engineer Zucker.
Again he speaks of the execution of sixteen persons for the
smuggling of mail, and mentions – on page 3 of the second
document – Guenther II (that was Guenther from Prague, not
to be confused with the permanent deputy of the Accused, his
brother, who was in Berlin). He says that Guenther II
personally supervised the execution of these sixteen Jews;
this was carried out in two stages, nine at the first, and
another seven at the second, stage. He says that at first
he refused to carry out the executions – until he received
an order from Prague.

On page 4 he mentions Obersturmfuehrer Burger, who succeeded
him in the administration of Theresienstadt in 1943, and
speaks of the great roll-call about which we have already
heard, and which was held in the Leitmeritzer Kessel (the
Leitmeritz Valley).

Last-Modified: 1999/06/02