The Adolf Eichmann case revisited : lessons learnt

Abstract

Much has been written about Adolf Eichmann’s trial in Israel by legal academics, journalists, intellectuals and others. Many observers of the day have labelled it as the “Jewish Nuremberg” in view of its sui generis charge of ‘crimes against the Jewish people’, a charge which created a dangerous precedent. Others have rubberstamped it as mere “political” and attribute to it only a minor role in the development of international criminal law. Some commentators however were more clear-headed and persuasive and branded the trial as fair and of acceptable standard in the realm of civilisation. This thesis aims to revisit the trial and to investigate whether any lessons were learnt from the decisions imparted by the Israeli courts and which stood the test of time especially with the birth of international courts and tribunals in recent decades. Chapter One serves as an introduction in attempting to answer the research question and highlights the trial’s seminal importance in the history of international criminal law. Chapter Two examines in detail the trial proceedings and delves into the handling of the complex issues faced, at the time, by the District Court of Jerusalem, particularly with illegal abduction, retroactive legislation, impartiality, acts of state and individual responsibility in international law. Chapter Three tackles criminal jurisdiction which proved to be a very contentious issue before the District Court of Jerusalem and the lesson learnt in favour of universal jurisdiction. Chapter Four elicits key lessons learnt from this controversial trial and confirms that the Eichmann proceedings did actually move international criminal law forward in some key areas. In conclusion, Chapter Five wraps up the whole work, with special emphasis being made on the move by the prosecution to establish a novel jurisprudence of eyewitness testimony of atrocities.