Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 63 views

    In Re Yamashita

    Uploaded by

    lennon tapiador
    The document summarizes the Supreme Court case In re Yamashita from 1946. The Court ruled that a military commission convened by a US commander to try a Japanese general for war crimes was lawful. The commission had authority under the Articles of War to try violations of the law of war committed before hostilities ended. The Court denied the general's petition for a writ of habeas corpus, finding the commission was properly created and had jurisdiction over the charge that the general failed to control his troops who committed atrocities.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    In Re Yamashita

    Uploaded by

    lennon tapiador
    63 views2 pages
    The document summarizes the Supreme Court case In re Yamashita from 1946. The Court ruled that a military commission convened by a US commander to try a Japanese general for war crimes was lawful. The commission had authority under the Articles of War to try violations of the law of war committed before hostilities ended. The Court denied the general's petition for a writ of habeas corpus, finding the commission was properly created and had jurisdiction over the charge that the general failed to control his troops who committed atrocities.

    Original Description:

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    The document summarizes the Supreme Court case In re Yamashita from 1946. The Court ruled that a military commission convened by a US commander to try a Japanese general for war crimes was lawful. The commission had authority under the Articles of War to try violations of the law of war committed before hostilities ended. The Court denied the general's petition for a writ of habeas corpus, finding the commission was properly created and had jurisdiction over the charge that the general failed to control his troops who committed atrocities.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    63 views2 pages

    In Re Yamashita

    Uploaded by

    lennon tapiador
    The document summarizes the Supreme Court case In re Yamashita from 1946. The Court ruled that a military commission convened by a US commander to try a Japanese general for war crimes was lawful. The commission had authority under the Articles of War to try violations of the law of war committed before hostilities ended. The Court denied the general's petition for a writ of habeas corpus, finding the commission was properly created and had jurisdiction over the charge that the general failed to control his troops who committed atrocities.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 2

    In re Yamashita - 327 U.S. 1, 66 S. Ct.

    340
    (1946)
    RULE:

    Congress, in the exercise of the power conferred upon it by U.S. Const. art. I, § 8, cl. 10
    to define and punish offences against the Law of Nations, of which the law of war is a
    part, had by the Articles of War, 10 U.S.C.S. §§ 1471-1593, recognized the "military
    commission" appointed by military command, as it had previously existed in United
    States Army practice, as an appropriate tribunal for the trial and punishment of offenses
    against the law of war. Article 15 declares that the provisions of these articles conferring
    jurisdiction upon courts martial shall not be construed as depriving military commissions
    or other military tribunals of concurrent jurisdiction in respect of offenders or offenses
    that by statute or by the law of war may be triable by such military commissions or other
    military tribunals.

    FACTS:

    Prior to September 3, 1945, petitioner was the Commanding General of the Fourteenth
    Army Group of the Imperial Japanese Army in the Philippine Islands. On that day, he
    surrendered to the United States Army and became a prisoner of war. Respondent was
    the Commanding General of the United States Army Forces, Western Pacific, whose
    command embraced the Philippine Islands. Respondent appointed a military commission
    to try the petitioner on a charge of violation of the law of war. The gist of the charge
    was that petitioner had failed in his duty as an army commander to control the
    operations of his troops, "permitting them to commit" specified atrocities against the
    civilian population and prisoners of war. Petitioner was found guilty and sentenced to
    death. Petitioner, seeking a writ of habeas corpus, contended that the military
    commission which tried him was unlawfully created and without jurisdiction.

    ISSUE:

    Was the military commission in question unlawfully created, thereby warranting the
    grant of habeas corpus in favor of petitioner?

    ANSWER:
    No.

    CONCLUSION:

    The court disagreed and denied the writ. First, the commission was not only created by a
    commander competent to appoint it, but his order conformed to the established policy
    of the government and was in complete conformity with the Articles of War, 10 U.S.C.S.
    §§ 1471-1593. Second, there was authority to convene the commission, even after
    hostilities had ended, to try violations of the law of war that were committed before the
    war's cessation, at least until peace was officially recognized by treaty or proclamation.
    Third, the charge against petitioner, which alleged that he breached his duty to control
    the operations of the members of his command by permitting them to commit specified
    atrocities, adequately alleged a violation of the law of war. And finally, petitioner was not
    entitled to any of the protections afforded by the Geneva Convention, part 3, Chapter 3,
    § V, Title III, because that chapter applied only to persons subjected to judicial
    proceedings for offenses committed while prisoners of war.

    You might also like