Session 103-02, Eichmann Adolf

Q. What you wrote was that you would indicate your objection
to any expression by underlying it. Here you have not drawn
a single stroke or line. So, clearly, you did not
dissociate yourself from this passage, and therefore you did
not voice any objections to it. Is that so?

A. No, that cannot be true, because I would naturally have
taken an adverse position, as it is just not true, because
that word was coined in the so-called “literary” way – this
term – because Mueller also did not use that word to me at
that time, in the forest, when he gave me my assignment and
the order to report to Geschke at Mauthausen, because no
word was…

Q. Did he tell you that you must ensure that the Warsaw
Ghetto uprising would not be repeated, or was the term
revolt in the Warsaw Ghetto even mentioned in connection
with Hungary?

A. At that time, in March, there was no such reference

Q. You have heard here statements about the first talks with
the Jewish representatives in Hungary, with Wisliceny, with
Krumey, and so on. You remember this, do you not?

A. Yes.
Q. These talks took place on the basis of your instructions.

A. I cannot say so for certain, as I do not know precisely
when I arrived in Budapest and when Wisliceny and Krumey…

Q. That is what your witness for the Defence, Krumey,
himself says on pages 9 and 10 of his statement, that is to
say, these discussions took place on your initiative.

A. In that case, that must be correct.

Q. And you yourself in person took part in the meeting of 31
March, did you not?

A. I do not remember the precise date, but I did take part
in this meeting which has been referred to repeatedly, yes.

Q. And document T/1156, the minutes of this meeting, shows
what the subject matter was. I believe you are familiar
with the document, which was drawn up by Dr. Ernoe Boda, and
I assume that you will confirm these minutes. Would you go
over this quickly, please, and say whether, in general
terms, this corresponds to what you remember.

A. Generally this is correct, but now I have come to the
phrase I cannot accept: “If, however, the Jews here were to
go over to the Ruthenian partisans, or to Tito’s gangs, as
in Greece, then I would slaughter them mercilessly.” I
cannot possibly have said that.

Q. But in general terms it is correct.

A. By and large, it is correct, yes, although I have not
gone into details – after all, I have just glanced at it.
Q. You were also questioned about the statement by Dr.
Patai, which was translated to you, and on pages 2988 and
the following pages of your Statement you indicated your
comments. You presumably remember this much. This
statement also refers to the meeting.

A. What I said about it, I do not remember.

Q. Do you have any reason for assuming that what you said
was incorrect?

A. Not everything I said in my Statement is absolutely
accurate, because I made mistakes, I confused things, and at
that time I did not have a comprehensive view and a proper
grasp of all the material, and I tried, as I said time and
time again during the Statement, I tried to reconstruct
things, and so the Statement is an attempt at

Q. As the Presiding Judge: has already said, we are
interested in those details which you remember.

Presiding Judge: Did you say Patai? Here I see the name
Munczi Ernoe, on page 2987. You mentioned page 2988.

Attorney General: Yes, I have the document here, the
statement by Dr. Ernoe.

Presiding Judge: You mentioned a page from T/37, 2988.
There the Accused was shown a translation from the book by
Munzci Ernoe, called How Did It Happen?

Attorney General: This is a book which contains the matters
recorded by Dr. Boda.

Presiding Judge: Did you say Patai?

Attorney General: Yes. These are two different documents.

Presiding Judge: In other words, we have the statement of

Attorney General: Yes. And we also have Patai’s statement –
that is T/1157.

Attorney General: [To the Accused] The meeting in which the
deportations were planned took place in Vienna, and Franz
Novak also took part in it. Correct?

Accused: I believe that Novak did take part in the
timetable conference – not the discussions on the
deportations, which were held between Kaltenbrunner and
Veesenmayer and Geschke – but the timetable conference which
was held in Vienna. Novak must definitely have taken part
in that.

Q. All the arrangements for the deportation of the Jews from
Hungary were made by your Section. Is that true?

A. If they involved technical transport aspects, such as
timetables and these matters, that is correct, that is true.

Q. And the men from your Section, as you yourself have
stated, were present whenever Jews were loaded into the
freight cars. Is that true?

A. I have no knowledge as to whether they were always
present. But they were at the various collection points, in
order to except Jews of foreign nationality, in accordance
with the directives issued by Veesenmayer’s office. That is
why they were present at the places where the Jews were
concentrated. And in fact, normally these were the loading

Q. That I do not understand. Why were you involved in
concerning yourself about Jews with foreign nationality in
Hungary? Hungary was, after all, a state, was it not? The
Hungarian gendarmerie allegedly rounded up Jews there. So
what business of yours was it whether they included Jews of
foreign nationality or not?

A. That I do not know. The instruction was issued by
Veesenmayer as Reich Plenipotentiary, and I received the
instructions and orders through my superior in Hungary.

Q. What were the contents of the general directives about
evacuations and deportations?

A. At the beginning, they covered the able-bodied only;
later no further directives were issued, once Kaltenbrunner
had arranged for general deportations in Hungary. That was
the reason why Kaltenbrunner came to Hungary.

Q. From the Hungarian border and beyond, Krumey and Novak
took over the deportation arrangements on their
responsibility, did they not?

A. No, not for the transports by train, only for the matters
concerning the foot march; not the train transports – those
were accompanied by units which were made available by the
Commander of the Order Police, or at least through the
Commander of the Security Police.

Q. Now look at what you said to the police, and there was
after all nothing further which could have become clear to
you from the documents. On page 2200 you said:

“I simply mean by this that at each loading point some
of my men had to be present, to check that the
evacuations were taking place in accordance with the

A. Yes, I did say that. At the beginning, directives were
given that only able-bodied were to be transported. And then
these directives lapsed, following instructions, because
according to the agreement everyone was to be deported, and
the Hungarian gendarmerie did in fact deport everyone.

Q. And in addition you said on page 279, in the middle, that
an observer from your staff always had to be present during

A. I said that because he was responsible for separating out
Jews with foreign nationality. Veesenmayer’s liaison
officer gave me the relevant instructions. He himself
inspected all the camps in turn, and he checked on the work
of my men.

Q. And the escorts were provided by the Order Police?

A. As far as I still remember, remember vaguely, only when
the transport train reached the Austrian…the German-
Hungarian border. There the gendarmerie handed over to the
Order Police. That is how things had always been, and I
cannot imagine it being different in Hungary.

Q. There were around one hundred people from the Order
Police, and they were at your disposal?

A. I do not know how many Order Policemen were available,
but they were not subordinate to me. They were subordinate
to the Commander of the Security Police and the Security
Service, or to the Commander of the Order Police, because
when it came to executive matters, I had nothing to do with
that in Hungary, but I did deal with technical matters.

Q. We shall see about that in a moment. Now, I am once again
showing you an extract from what you told Sassen, containing
corrections in your handwriting. Would you look at this and
see whether there are corrections there?

A. Yes.

Q. You added words. Would you please read this section.
You were asked a question first; so please read out the
question first, and then the answer.

A. I need slip No. 76 here, then I will read this out.

Q. Please read out what is written there.

A. It is not right, as slip 76 is missing. I made this
objection at the time.

Q. The correction slip 76 refers to four words which you
crossed out, but words have remained which you have not
crossed out, and I am asking you to read them out.

A. Correction slip 76 – it does not say that this refers to
four words, because…

Q. You can correct what you want later. First just read it
out, and then make any comments you wish to make.

A. Yes.

“Do you know anything about the technique, about the
way the Hungarians carried out the concentration of the
Jews? Were you ever present?”

“No. I did not see any loading into the cars, because
it was such a subordinate matter, for which I also had
no responsibility, for which I had no time. But I have
seen loading into various freight cars at various
places in the Reich.”

Then there are some words which have been crossed out.

“Never in Hungary. Nor was it my duty – it was the
duty of the Hungarian gendarmerie. That would have
been interference in the jurisdiction of the Hungarian
authorities. They loaded and supplied the trains with
rations for so many days; that was the agreement with
the State Secretary for transport escorts. With the
State Secretary. I had received under my control
several hundred men from the Order Police for transport
escort duty, and in my directives I gave orders for
each transport train to consist of one lieutenant and
thirty men, one staff sergeant with thirty men, so in
Hungary I had – dot dot dot – I could at the very most
have seen it in a private capacity, but never in an
official or service capacity.”

Q. Did you say that?

A. I do not know, but slip No. 76 refers to the entire page,
where it says, for example, “I had received under my control
several hundred men from the Order Police” – I did not have
even one hundred men from the Order Police under my control,
let alone several hundred men.

Q. How many did you have?

A. I did not receive under my control a single man from the
Order Police.

Q. You had representatives in the various districts in
Hungary, did you not?

A. No, they were not representatives, they were leaders,
officers, whom I had to detail to those places in order to
ensure that the arrangements for Jews of foreign nationality
were respected. That was the most important thing we had to
observe. The Hungarian gendarmerie was responsible for the
other matters.

Q. Are you telling us here that all you did was to make sure
that Jews of foreign nationality in Hungary were not touched
– that was your entire assignment and your entire task in

A. No, that was not it. The assignment was, moreover, to
keep a constant watch on and observe timetable matters, by
permanent contacts with the Reich Railway Directorate – I
think it was Vienna – and the assignment was also to collect
the reports, which came in from all over from my people, and
for me to make an overall report to the Commander of the
Security Police and the Higher SS and Police Leader, and
simultaneously for Berlin too. My task was also the notice,
that is to say, the notification of the departure of the
train, and also certainly the confirmation of the arrival of
the train. That was also part of my duties. I would like
to say about this also – I forgot to say this – that in
accordance with orders, I had to maintain contact with
Secretary of State Endre, and less with Baky. I had
instructions on that too, but that was the limit of my
activity in Hungary.

Q. This contact with Endre was in order to lay down the
details of the evacuation of Hungarian Jewry, was it not?

A. No; I did not need to lay down anything with Endre; I
only had to learn from Endre what orders he had given to his
gendarmerie, because I was obliged to do that vis-a-vis the
Reich Railway Directorate…

Q. You met Endre every day, did you not?

A. Every day is an exaggeration.

Q. An exaggeration – but that is what you said on page 922.
Very well, almost every day, all right? Is that better?

A. I would say – and that is fairly accurate – there may
often have been weeks when I went to him every day, and
often there was a whole week when I did not go to him at

Last-Modified: 1999/06/14