Session 084-01, Eichmann Adolf

Session No. 84
19 Tammuz 5721 (3 July 1961)

Presiding Judge: I declare the eighty-fourth Session of the
trial open.

Dr. Servatius, you have on several occasions made reference
to books by Poliakov and Reitlinger, and the Accused has
also referred to several pages from these books. If there
is any intention to refer to the documents which appear
there, it would be expedient for you to have copies made of
such documents and submit such copies as exhibits for the

Dr. Servatius: Your Honour, I have not yet had the time to
discuss this matter in depth with the Accused – I shall
check and then submit the relevant pages as special
exhibits. Perhaps I will submit them after the examination
is concluded, to avoid wasting time.

Presiding Judge: Very well, you can also do so after the
Accused has finished his testimony, but if the Accused
wishes to say something about these documents, that is to
say, about these copies, then they must be submitted before
he concludes his testimony, or rather before the end of the
examination of the Accused.

Dr. Servatius: Your Honour, I intend, at the end of the
direct examination, to deal with a number of individual
matters, amongst which I would also wish to touch upon this

Presiding Judge: Very well.

Dr. Servatius: Your Honour, I am now concluding the
documents on Greece and hope today to deal with Bulgaria,
Romania, Italy and Slovakia, and perhaps also to start on
Hungary, so that tomorrow I can deal with Hungary and the
concentration camp chapter. Then, depending on how fast we
progress, I might use Wednesday morning for the general

Presiding Judge: Very well. The Accused will continue his
testimony in direct examination. I draw the Accused’s
attention to the fact that he is still testifying under

Accused: I am aware of that fact.

Presiding Judge: Please proceed.

Dr. Servatius: I shall continue with my discussion of the
exhibits and will present various passages as evidence.

First of all, exhibit T/973, document No. 1006. A
communication from the Foreign Ministry, signed Wagner, to
the consulate general in Salonika, dated 21 May 1943. It
concerns the Jewish families holding French nationality who
are to return from Salonika; the French Government is urging
their return. In the second paragraph it says:

“Neither the German Embassy in Paris, nor the Foreign
Ministry, is interested in repatriating these French
Jews. Without going into the question of treatment of
Jews possessing other nationalities, the Paris Embassy
will notify the French Government in two weeks’ time
that deportation was necessary for military and
security policy reasons and has already been carried
out, so that the French enquiry is no longer relevant.”

Then there is the direction: “Please notify the authorities
at your end, so as to ensure that the deportation of French
nationals is completed in time.” In the cover note to
Eichmann it says: “For your information, and requesting that
corresponding instructions be issued to the Operations

Next exhibit – T/986, document No. 1008. Communication from
the Foreign Ministry, von Thadden, dated 17 June 1943. This
concerns Italian protests at operations in Greece.
Reference is made to a complaint about Wisliceny’s
activities elsewhere in Greece. It says that the Foreign
Ministry states its position on the matter. This shows how
Wisliceny worked together with the diplomatic…with the
missions. It says:

“Moreover Wisliceny is said to be making regular trips
from Salonika to Athens, in order to contact the German
authorities there, and in particular the Reich

Next exhibit – T/963, document No. 241. Letter from the
commanding officer Salonika-Aegaeis to the Macedonian
Government General: it should read “Administration of Jewish
Property, Salonika.” It says: “In accordance with
instructions from higher authority, the ownership of all
Jewish property now or previously in the area of command of
the military commander of Salonika-Aegaeis is hereby
transferred to the ownership of the Greek state.”

The next exhibit is T/993, document No. 421. Note from the
Foreign Ministry, von Thadden, to Eichmann’s office, dated
28 July 1943. It says that the Italian Government wishes to
transfer Spanish Jews from Salonika to Athens. Then it
says: “The Reich Plenipotentiary stated that he had the
gravest objections to such a transfer, as it would markedly
damage the Reich’s reputation.” At the end it says: “It is
suggested that the Operations Unit in Salonika be given the
requisite instructions, in order to avoid in time any
transfer of the Jews to the area occupied by the Italians.”

Next exhibit – T/988, document No. 1010. This is a
communication from the Foreign Ministry, von Thadden, dated
24 July 1943, to Eichmann’s office. It deals with foreign
Jews in Greece, and proposes that these foreign Jews should
not remain entirely unmolested, and proposes instead, at the
bottom of the first page, “that these Jews be accommodated
in something like an internment camp.”

Next exhibit – T/996, document No. 176. This is a
communication from Neubacher, Special Representative for the
South-East, to the Foreign Ministry, dated 27 November 1943.
He reports that the action planned against eight thousand
Jews has lost its point, since they are in hiding – the
Higher SS Leader is of the same opinion. The handwritten
note on page 2 below the printed text is important; as far
as I can make it out, it says – it is not very clear –
“…settled by phone between himself, Kaltenbrunner and
Neubacher, and therefore deportations would be carried out.”

Presiding Judge: There is a figure, I believe, and the name
Eichmann – “discussed on 4 December with

Dr. Servatius: “Discussed with Obersturmbannfuehrer
Eichmann…Kaltenbrunner…” and then you can make out “not
in agreement,” but then at the end it says, “settled by
phone between himself, Kaltenbrunner and Neubacher, and
therefore deportations to be carried out.”

Attorney General: I should like to point out that this is
exhibit T/37(97); the document is possibly more legible in
that version – we did decipher the entire note, and the
Court can see in the Hebrew translation that we managed to
decipher and translate the entire document.

Presiding Judge: We do not have the translation into Hebrew.

Judge Raveh: Dr. Servatius, on the first page there is a
reference to the Jews who have been registered and who are
the contingent of least interest (das uninteressanteste
Kontingent). Perhaps, if you so wish, you could have the
Accused explain to us what this means? Why are these people
the “contingent of least interest”?

Dr. Servatius: Witness, have you read the document? Do you
have it in front of you?

Accused: I do.

Dr. Servatius: As you see, it says that only twelve hundred
of the eight thousand actually reported – the others were in
hiding. Then it says that these twelve hundred are the
contingent of least interest. You heard the Judge’s
question: Why is this called the contingent of least

Accused: The only thing I can do is to try and imagine
today how things were at the time. Instructions must have
been issued with regard to deportations ordered, and, as a
result, the remainder of the eight thousand, minus the
twelve hundred, the young people probably, fled to the
mountains or the vicinity and went into hiding – so that
those who were not prepared or able to flee were those who
remained. At that point the envoy, the Reich
Plenipotentiary …Neubacher realized that if these twelve
hundred were deported, there would be no way of reaching the
others, and he, therefore, sent a report to the Foreign
Ministry with the request that the Chief of the Security
Police and the SD take a decision.

Dr. Servatius: Witness, you have not replied to the
question at all. Perhaps you did not understand it. It was
why these twelve hundred who were the remainder are called
here “of no interest” – they must have possessed some
characteristic which led to this expression of lack of
interest in them. Perhaps you should read this letter
again, this time more carefully.

Accused: The reason why they are of no interest is
because – this is what I would assume – they are people who
are not fit, whereas those who – let us say in military
terms – are more important have escaped to the hills or the
vicinity. That is what I would assume to be the reason.

Presiding Judge: Very well.

Judge Halevi: It says there also: “Those who were of much
greater interest politically.” Not militarily, but
politically more interesting.

Presiding Judge: Since the Accused did not write this
letter, I do not consider that much significance is to be
attached to the interpretations of the Accused.

Dr. Servatius: I come now to exhibit T/992.

Attorney General: I crave the Court’s indulgence: we have in
the meanwhile received the translation about which the Court
enquired. If the Court is interested in seeing how we
deciphered and translated the passage – we considered this
to be two separate comments. The Accused himself deciphered
the writing. It is referred to on pages 347 and following
of his Statement.

Dr. Servatius: T/992, document No. 235. This is a solemn
declaration by Wisliceny, dated 27 June 1946, drawn up in
Bratislava. In it Wisliceny outlines his activities in
Greece, and on page 3 he says that he went to see Eichmann,
and asked him to call a temporary halt to deportations
because of an epidemic of spotted fever. On the next page,
page 4, he repeats this and says, “since the chief army
doctor protested to the military commander against
continuing the deportations because of the increasing number
of cases of spotted fever, I sent a further telegram.”

Witness, do you know anything about these steps on the part
of Wisliceny to which he refers here?

Accused: No, I know nothing about this.

Dr. Servatius: He goes on to say that he left Greece,
having reported sick with an eye disease. Do you know
anything about that?

Accused: No, I know nothing about that either.

Dr. Servatius: On page 5 it says:

“At the end of September 1943 I was once again ordered
to Athens, as the official in charge of Eichmann’s
Section, under the Senior Commander of the Security
Police. Eichmann himself gave me the strictest orders
that all Jews in Athens and the rest of Greece were
immediately to be concentrated and deported to

Witness, do you know anything about this operation?

Accused: This was the real reason why, on the orders of
the Security Police or the Chief of Department IV, Mueller,
Wisliceny had been dispatched to this area. The orders for
deportation were issued, not by myself, but they were
obtained by Mueller himself from his superior, and Mueller
personally implemented this individual policy with these
aforementioned instructions that the deportations be carried
out in accordance with orders. Because in Greece, Wisliceny
was not acting in a vacuum, but was subordinate to the
Senior Commander of the Security Police and the SD, as can
be seen clearly from the documents available here.

Presiding Judge: The question is whether you spoke to
Wisliceny and passed on this order to him or delivered it to
him orally.

Accused: Your Honour, today I cannot reply exactly – it
is possible that I did, but it is also possible that he
received this order directly from Mueller.

Dr. Servatius: Exhibit T/999, document No. 1263. This is a
sworn affidavit by one Erwin Lenz, dated 10 May 1947, with
reference to operations on the island of Rhodes. On page 2
he says that in June 1944 two SS officers appeared on the
island, and then the Jews were loaded on to boats and died
at sea.

Witness, what do you know about the operation described

Accused: I know nothing at all about these local matters.

Dr. Servatius: With this I conclude the section on Greece.
I turn now to Bulgaria. I would first submit a diagram
outlining the chain of command.

Witness, is this diagram drawn according to your draft, and
is it correct?

Accused: It is drawn according to my draft, and it is

Presiding Judge: I shall mark this exhibit N/56.

Dr. Servatius: At the right it says “see accompanying text”
– this text is not attached. The first exhibit I wish to
discuss is T/929, document No. 1025.* {*Erroneously reffered
to as document No. 1925 on page 843, Volume II} This is a
communication from the Foreign Ministry to Eichmann, dated
23 November 1942. It is an enquiry as to whether, as
proposed, Wisliceny can be assigned to Sofia as Jewish
Adviser. It says, “in accordance with our proposal” the
legation is putting pressure on the Bulgarian Government to
state its position. It then continues: “More particularly,
I would be grateful for an indication as to whether, in
accordance with the proposal already made, Wisliceny can be
assigned here.”

The next exhibit is T/931, document No. 1026. The Foreign
Ministry, Bergmann, to Mueller – communication dated 19
March 1942, agreement from that end to dispatch an Adviser
on Jewish Affairs to Sofia gratefully acknowledged.
Dannecker is being sent.

The next exhibit is T/932, document No. 1028, German
legation, Sofia, Envoy Beckerle to the Foreign Ministry,
dated 8 February 1943. In the middle it says that Beckerle
presented Dannecker to the government, and he writes:
“Before presenting Dannecker, I spoke with the Minister of
the Interior on the matter; he confirmed his previously
expressed firm intention to resettle all the Jews.” On the
third sheet, page 2 of the second document, it says: “The
(Bulgarian) Minister of the Interior stated lastly that
planning and all individual questions should be discussed
with the Commissioner for Jewish Affairs, Belev.” It says
that this Adviser on Jewish Affairs submitted to the
Minister for the Interior for approval by the Council of
Ministers the following proposal: (a) for the time being to
deport twenty thousand Jews, and (b) later, total
deportation. On the last page of the communication, in the
last paragraph, Dannecker writes: “It would be important to
ascertain now what the arrangements for the accompanying
escort for the transport will be. It would be highly
desirable for the transfer to a German unit to take place
already on Bulgarian territory.” Signed: Dannecker, but
also Beckerle.

Last-Modified: 1999/06/09