Judge Raveh: I have another question with regard to this
exhibit which I should like to put to the Witness. On page 6
there is an entry, Commando of the Representative of the
Commander of the Security Police and the Security Service,
etc. What is the meaning here of commando?
Accused: Your Honour, I am unable today to give you
precise and detailed information about this, as I do not
know; these provisions – that is to say, the distribution
list was prescribed, and this provision included the
commando of the representative which is mentioned here. From
the text I gather that there was a General of the supporting
forces, who was doubtless stationed in the military area at
the rear, and to this General was assigned a commando of the
Commander of the Security Police, and in order to ensure
that all Jews of foreign nationality in all the territories
would be covered in accordance with the order – which was
the real reason for the constant discussions between my
Section and the section of the Foreign Ministry – my Section
could have been included in the distribution list.
There is another, more detailed explanation on page 10,
where on the extreme right the name of two officials in
charge in Section IVB4, that is my Section, appear, and then
comes IVD, which was the Group in the Head Office for Reich
Security responsible for the Occupied Territories, and in
this case, this particular case, the formula for the
distribution list was determined by IVD, on page 6. There is
also reference to Department II of the Head Office for Reich
Security, and on the left the Foreign Ministry is given as
the co-signatory, this is the counterpart to what was
mentioned earlier, when reference was made to the fact that
I was co-signatory to some documents from the Foreign
These sections referred to, that is to say the Heads of
these sections determined the formula for the distribution
list about which I was asked.
Judge Raveh: Do you remember a Hauptsturmfuehrer Plath?
Accused: No, I never saw him and do not know him.
Judge Raveh: And you do not know whether he was connected
with your Section, or with Department IV?
Accused: I really cannot say whether he was connected
with Department IV; he had no connection with my Section, as
far as I know.
Dr. Servatius: I shall omit an exhibit, and come now to
T/769, document No. 173. This is a communication from the
Foreign Ministry to Eichmann, with reference to a
communication dated 8 February 1943. On page 2 of the letter
it says that the Foreign Ministry, therefore, asks for some
30,000 Jews to be made available, who appear suitable for
any future exchange and have the nationalities referred to
above. The countries concerned are listed above. The
countries are listed in document 9 and I shall not read them
Witness, did you have anything to do with the selection of
these 30,000 foreign Jews?
Accused: I had no more to do with this than the actual
processing of the paper work. I can well imagine that in
accordance with the agreement between the Head Office for
Reich Security and the Foreign Ministry, the relevant
circulars were issued to the subordinate departments with
orders to keep these categories of persons apart, and then
in the end there was some transport, as was shown in a
previous exhibit, where there were complaints from the
Foreign Ministry about the running of the camps.
Judge Halevi: Who was responsible for the decision? On the
second page it says that the Foreign Ministry proposes that
Jews of this or that type be kept in reserve, and this
proposal is made to the Accused. So who decided on the final
Accused: In accordance with an order from the Commander
of the Security Police and the Security Service, the final
selection was decided on by the local headquarters of the
Security Police in agreement with the local Representatives
of the Foreign Ministry. Especially in the
Generalgouvernement the representatives of the Foreign
Ministry were called Plenipotentiaries of the Foreign
Ministry. They had to determine the categories, which
nationalities – not the staff of the Security Police which
lacked the relevant expertise – but before that there had to
be a general authorization. I remember that as far as this
general authorization of the selection was concerned, that
is making 30,000 Jews available for exchange, there had to
be an arrangement between Himmler and Ribbentrop. Whether
this preceded the original proposal of a subordinate section
in the Foreign Ministry, or whether it was subsequent to it,
is something which I can no longer say today.
Dr. Servatius: I come now to exhibit T/310, document No.
788. This is a communication from IVB4, dated 5 March 1943
about a decree on foreign nationals, signed by
Kaltenbrunner. I also take the next exhibit, T/761, document
No. 535. This is roughly the same decree with similar
content. In one case the decree is headed “Reich Ministry of
the Interior” while in the other case it is headed
“Commander of the Security Police and Security Service.”
Witness, can you explain the distinction between these two
letterheads and the differences between the two decrees?
Accused: Today, I am not able to explain the distinction
between the letterhead “Reich Ministry of the Interior” and
that of “Commander of the Security Police and Security
Service.” This was laid down by ordinance, and I cannot give
any further details on the matter. This, too, indicates IVB4
in the heading, which shows me that it was dealt with by the
same official – a jurist – who in January carried out the
preliminary work; he doubtless had various legal reasons.
Judge Halevi: Is this not the final version of the previous
draft which was discussed? Is this not the final version of
exhibit T/271, Prosecution document No. 9?
Accused: Yes, Your Honour, that is why I thought that
IVB4b was the same jurist who worked on it previously, who
worked on document No. 9, where I pointed out the letterhead
IVB4, Regierungsrat Hunsche.
Judge Halevi: And there Dr. Servatius maintained that the
i.V. (in Vertretung – on behalf of) in No. 271 meant that
the Accused could not sign it, and in fact one finds here
Kaltenbrunner’s signature on the final version.
Dr. Servatius: The final version, indeed, bears the
signature of Kaltenbrunner, but apparently there was to be
some signing on behalf of – I assume that either Mueller or
Kaltenbrunner was to sign on behalf of the Reich Ministry of
the Interior, because he also would have had to sign if he
was not the Reich Minister himself.
The next exhibit is T/790, document No. 1418. The Accused
has already spoken about this. It concerns these camps for
some 30,000 foreigners, who might be exchanged in return for
Germans. At the end it reads:
“In conclusion it should be noted that both the Camp
Commander and the person responsible for looking after
the group of Jews now accommodated in the camp, SS
Hauptsturmfuehrer Seidl, are entirely aware of the
major inadequacies and weaknesses of the camp in its
current form, and are trying with the means available
to them to remedy the situation.”
Then there is a sentence which reads:
“However, without the assistance from the central
authorities it will be impossible to deal as required
with the current inadequacies. The Foreign Ministry
would ask to be kept informed about future developments
in the matter.”
I shall omit several exhibits and come now to document No.
298, which has no T number as yet.
Judge Halevi: Just to come back to the previous exhibit
T/790. Did the Accused not say today that this was a matter
for the Economic-Administrative Head Office and not for the
Head Office for Reich Security? The exchange camp was Bergen-
Belsen, that is what it says here – do you have the
document? The Foreign Ministry addresses you, and criticizes
Bergen-Belsen as a camp of this type. Why were you dealing
with this matter?
Accused: Your Honour, I have already said that since all
the correspondence passed through my Section, the Foreign
Ministry continued to send these matters to me as well.
Neither I, nor my Section, could take a decision as to which
camp these exchange Jews were to be sent to. These matters
had to be dealt with at the lowest rank between Mueller and
Gluecks, but probably between the Commander of the Security
Police and the Chief of the Economic-Administrative Head
Office. In the Bergen-Belsen camp – I still remember this
from then and I have also read about it in the post-war
literature – this section was a specially segregated part of
the Bergen-Belsen Concentration Camp. This camp really had
nothing to do with the Bergen-Belsen Concentration Camp.
Different rules and regulations applied to it. But in
economic terms as well as with regard to board, lodging and
accommodation, this part was also exclusively subordinate to
the Economic-Administrative Head Office, since it was simply
an exempted sector. However, as far as the personal aspect
was concerned, this was something which was dealt with by
the Commander of the Security Police, or the Chief of
Department IV, or in the end also by my Section and the
Foreign Ministry and not by the Economic-Administrative Head
Office. Only right at the end of the War – so I heard after
the War – did the situation in this camp also become
unsatisfactory, as a result of the overcrowding resulting
from the movement ordered by Himmler of prisoners from
abandoned concentration camps, but that was in…
Judge Halevi: That was not the question. Thank you.
Dr. Servatius: I turn now to document No. 298 which has not
yet been submitted, and which I offer as evidence. This is a
communication from the Foreign Ministry to Eichmann, dated
22 December 1943. This is a communication in which the
Spanish Embassy gives notice that it will recall the Spanish
Presiding Judge: I mark this exhibit N/28.
Dr. Servatius: Von Thadden asks the Accused for a list of
Jews interned in Bergen-Belsen.
Witness, did you draw up such a list?
Accused: Today, I do not remember, but I am sure that I
drew up the list.
Dr. Servatius: Or was the comment in the communication on
pages 3-4 of any significance? It says there “that the
Ambassador had been told that no Jew, if he happened to
possess a Spanish passport, was neutral, but must be
considered to be an enemy of Germany, because as Jews they
were notorious enemies of Germany.”
Did that influence you in your further activities?
Accused: It was not a question of anything influencing me
– I could not decide anything on my own authority, I
received my orders, and the matter was dealt with in
accordance with the orders.
Dr. Servatius: I would like to submit document No. 458,
which has no T number as yet. This is the order of the
Military Commander in France dated 4 February 1942, dealing
with the deportation of Jews.
Witness, would you explain whether this order, or the
content of the order, was of importance for your activities?
Accused: I should first of all like to correct something:
It was not called “Deportation of Jews” but “Emigration of
Jews.” Naturally Himmler’s ban was of major importance.
First of all, this put a final stop to emigration, and
secondly, it was important because subsequently the many
requests for emigration all had to be turned down on the
basis of this decree; whereas the chiefs could give final
approval in exceptional cases – it says explicitly, if there
was a positive or genuine interest for the Reich – the
office, Section IVB4 had to give a negative answer. These
were far-reaching consequences.
Presiding Judge: I mark this exhibit N/29.
Dr. Servatius: The next exhibit I wish to discuss is
T/1138, document No. 510. I would refer to page 2, where it
says that “as in the case of the procedure applied in the
occupied Dutch territories, well-to-do Jews of Slovak
nationality, or if need be also their close relatives,
should be allowed to leave Slovakia and enter the territory
of the Reich; on payment of a suitable amount in Pengoe
these Jews should be allowed to emigrate further.”
Witness, what do you know of this practice in your Section?
Accused: This document was originally connected with the
exhibit just dealt with, N/29, and it confirms what I have
said. However the character here is rather different – on
page 2 of this communication it says that the money which SS
Gruppenfuehrer Berger requires for voluntary recruiting for
the Waffen-SS in Hungary, etc. In other words, this
Gruppenfuehrer Berger of the SS Head Office came to Mueller
and discussed the possibility of proposing to the
Reichfuehrer-SS and Chief of the German Police that he allow
Jews, who had not so far submitted an application, to
emigrate, up to a number required to obtained the amount of
thirty million Pengoe. These matters exceeded the scale and
capacity of Section IVB4, and could only be dealt with by
the chiefs, and in accordance with the instructions of my
Department Chief in this case I drafted this letter, which
was then submitted to Himmler.
Dr. Servatius: Would the Witness look at the last sentence
in the communication and comment on it?
Accused: Since the Chief of Department IV, Mueller,
clearly had no one available to deal with foreign exchange
aspects of this matter, Mueller and Berger agreed that Pohl,
of the Economic-Administrative Head Office, should be the
authority responsible for economic matters.
Dr. Servatius: The next exhibit is T/928, document No. 127.
This is a communication from Eichmann to the Foreign
Ministry, dated 17 November 1942. In the first paragraph
with regard to the emigration of Jews from Bulgaria, it
says: “I believe that there is agreement to the effect that
German authorities cannot generally be called upon to
facilitate the emigration of Jews, but rather should be
hindering such emigration in every way, or at least delaying
Would you comment on this statement which you made?
Accused: Since Himmler’s ban, every matter which involved
emigration had to be submitted to the Chief of Department,
and a request made for instructions. He was the only person
who could issue orders, being the lowest authority to do so,
if he did issue orders by himself and did not pass the
matter on in his turn. These instructions, and decisions of
the Department Chief, were then passed on to the office
which had submitted the application through Section IVB4,
unless the situation was such that Mueller decided that he
himself would sign.
Dr. Servatius: Exhibit T/946, document No. 830. In this the
German Embassy in Sofia is informed that the British are
promoting the emigration of 5,000 Jews to Palestine. The
German Embassy in Sofia has been instructed to wait and see.
Page 2 contains a handwritten note to the effect that this
communication was sent to you for your reaction. Do you wish
to comment on the document?
Dr. Servatius: First of all, did you reply at the time?
Accused: Whether I or my Section replied to this matter,
or whether the Chief of Department IV himself replied I
cannot say today.