THE WITNESS: Well he told me it is proceeded in the following manner: The Executive Officials reported about it -
THE PRESIDENT: No, no, no. I'll be able to recite this backwards, if you tell it to me again, what the procedure is. I only asked you if your predecessor said to you that that was procedure which he followed, the procedure which he outlined to you.
THE WITNESS: Yes, yes. He told me this is the manner in which it is being done.
THE PRESIDENT: Proceed, please proceed, before he starts again. Ask him another question Dr. Riediger.
Q (By Dr. Riediger) How were the shootings carried out. Sometimes there were ten, or under ten, or then to twenty people, as I understood you, who were shot together. Did they have to take off their outor clothing, or, how was it gone about? tive authorities to the effect that the persons concerned who were to he shot should not witness a preceding execution. With these executions it was thus that the people who were to be executed were formed into groups, and three were led to the place of execution. The execution was carried out and before the next group arrived at the place of execution the corpses were taken away. There was an explicit order to that effect. the part if other units? mations of army units. For instance, in the AOK of the Army there was an anti-partisan combat unit.
THE PRESIDENT: Witness, you said that corpses were taken away. We don't quite understand that. Were they not buried there?
THE WITNESS: Your Honor, the corpses were buried and they were put into the ditch which had been dug and they were carried into this ditch, but --
THE PRESIDENT: I see. And they were shot three at a time?
THE WITNESS: One, two, three persons, that is so.
THE PRESIDENT: How many made up the execution squad?
THE WITNESS: The execution squad consisted of six to seven people. It was a group of six to seven people who fired.
THE PRESIDENT: ALL right Q. (By Dr. Riediger) Were there extensive executions on the part of other units during your time and did that effect the frontal situation and how was that frontal situation at your time?
A. The situation at the front concerning the security of the frontal zone was such that insecurity became stronger and stronger, as I was told by people in the Army with the Russian invasion in the northern frontal area which took place at the end of January or the beginning of February, as I was told.
Q. Did SK 4B have anything to do with these anti-partisan combats through the Army?
A. Yes, in so far as on the part of the Wehrmacht such anti-partisan combat actions were also dealt with by their kommandos. I had extensive discussions with the officers of the Army and I was under the impression that -- it was, in fact, expressed that the Army in order to support the officials of the Secret Field Police, recommended the fact that they had officials of the kommando and men of the kommando for their use; as far as operations for executions were concerned, which were carried out by units of the Wehrmacht, the Kommando had nothing to do. The officials or the men who were detailed for such purposes in this case came under the commander of the Army, the military commander, that is, of the unit.
Q. Did the execution activity or general activities in this sphere -- did this take up all your time, or what was your main activity during the time you were with Einsatzkommando?
A. The executive activity of the kommando was not the sale task of the kommando, as such. Perhaps I can make it even clearer if I say that the securing of the frontal zone which was the task of the kommando did not only mean the apprehending of people and execution of guilty persons, but it also contained the apprehension and investigation of the general morale within the population, and I want to point out one things here.
During my time in the frontal areas of the 17th Army, there was famine. There was even a famine that the military authorities were very worried about it. That was also a part of the assignments of the kommando to find ways and means and assist the Army in order to cope with these conditions, because otherwise, of course, they were contributing towards the insecurity of these areas, and just this assignment alone took up very much time and we took it very much to heart. At the beginning of Spring, it was tried with every means to further the cultivating of products of the fields, and to be able to cope with the food supply. The roving about of the population was a problem in itself. The roving about of civilian outside of their local residence was forbidden and was liable to be punished by death: but it could not be prevented that the population left their places and a solution had to be found to this particular problem. During my time it was found and the roving about of the population was no longer punishable except at on particular area if 10 kilometres width, which was behind the front line, but there was a threat that every civilian who was met there was punishable by death and that, of course, he would immediately be shot at, but in this manner we were able to free one particular sector in which the population could find food which was hidden here and there and they could proceed to search for it.
THE PRESIDENT: Do I understand you to say, witness, that part of your activities consisted of planting fruit tress in order to relieve the famine?
A. Your Honor, no. There were other measures.
THE PRESIDENT: Well, I have here in my notes that you planted fruit trees. Did I misunderstand you?
A. No, no, no. We did not plant fruit trees, but we tried to employ the population who could work to encourage them that in the spring they would plant various kinds of things - food.
THE PRESIDENT: Well, did you say something about planting fruit trees?
A. I am not aware of hiving used that word.
THE PRESIDENT: Well, then perhaps I misunderstood. That's what I got - that either you planted fruit trees or you had somebody plant fruit trees and I was wondering what kind of a tree it was that would fructify so quickly that in two months time you would have fruit to pass around to the population.
MR. HILDESHEIMER: I think it must have been my mistake, Your Honor.
THE PRESIDENT: Very well, Mr. Hildesheimer. BY DR. RIEDIGER:
Q. How and when were you detailed from your Kommando and recalled?
A. In the middle of June I was recalled. I got a radio message and I was supposed to leave immediately.
Q. When did you leave the kommando and who did you turn it over to?
A. I have already said I left the kommando a few days after this, after I received another radio message to leave immediately. The leadership of the Kommando was given over to the leader of the executive department.
Q. Where did you go? Did you go back to the RSHA?
A. First of all I was taken over again to my former position in the RSHA.
Q. How long did you remain there?
A. There I remained until July 1943.
Q. Did you go on with your attempts to leave?
A. Yes. I used Heydrich's death as and occasion to talk to Streckenbach and request from him to agree that now I would be able to leave. Streckenbach basically agreed to it but he thought that at the moment it would not be feasible. I would like to add here this was due to conditions of the War and that there was a lack of staff and that leads to the fact that my attempts until then had been of no avail.
Q. Were you offered any positions during that time?
A. During that time - not at first. I tried - this again I had reported to Streckenbach - I, as I said, tried myself to get s some authority to ask for my services and when, I think, that must have been in January, Kaltenbrunner took over office in the RSHA I approached him immediately with the same request i.e. to release me. I was under the impression that he basically agreed but he again said it would not be feasible at the moment but in a few months he would not object. Then I learned - that was the beginning of 1943, the spring of 1943 - that the Plenipotentiary in Denmark, Dr. Best, was looking for a higher administrative official for his administration department and I applied for this job. In the spring of 1943 this job was actually offered to me and I immediately accepted it.
Q. Had you not been offered a position before-that is what I meant when I asked you this question.
A. Yes, two positions were offered to me. One was the position offered to my by Kaltenbrunner immediately, for the second time by Kaltenbrunner through the then office chief Schulz, a position in the General Government which I refused.
The next offer made to me was that I was requested whether I should take over a position in the party Chancelery. This I refused also.
Q. Why did you refuse?
A. I refused because my aims and my attempts for the last years and my only wish had been to work in the General Administration.
Q. When you accepted the position in Denkark with Dr. Best did you actually leave the RSHA or were you only detailed to another position?
A. I left the RSHA as far as personnel goes and also physically.
Q. What did your activities in Denmark consist of and was it in connection with the SD or RSHA?
A. No it was not connected with that as I have already answered in my preceding answer. It was pruely a position of Interior Administration. I was detailed by the Reich Minister of the Interior via the Reich Minister of Foreign Affairs to the Plenipotentiary and I was active there in the section administration and law with the office of the Plenipotentiary in Denmark.
Q. What did your activities consist of in detail? Your activities, that is, with Dr. Best?
A. It was a purely administrative task and my special assignment under War conditions prevailing was to reconcile the interests of the German Occupation Power and the relationship of the Danish authorities and the Danish population.
Q. How was your relationship in Denmark with the Security Police and SD?
A. I had no particular relation but the relationship with the German Police as such did exist naturally. That was conditioned through the situation in Denmark and I was in strong opposition with them eventually.
Q. How did this opposition come about?
A. When I arrived in Denmark, in the end of August 1943, the disarmament of the Danish Remaining Army had just been brought into effect. That happened in the manner which pointed out the contrast very strongly between the Germans and Danes. In the course of these measures numerous arrests had been carried out, arrests of Danish civilians. The Retch Plenipotentiary, when I reported for service, assigned to me a special task which was to investigate the individual cases of the arrested persons by the requests of the Danish Central Government and which resulted that the larger part of those people who had been arrested had to be released as sufficient reasons had not been established to keep them under arrest.
Q. Do you remember any other cases in which you assisted people who had been arrested or interned?
A. Yes on numbrous occasions I tried to assist and find out about individual cases and tried to avoid any unnecessary harshness which I thought was in our mutual interest. On occasions the German Police by orders, I should think as, however, I only found out after 1945, of higher authorities in Berlin carried out vigorous measures. This in fact resulted in severe opposition to the German Police and, as I said, I tried to settle this.
Q. Did you have anything to do with internment camps?
A. Yes, as far as American and English internment camps were concerned. English and American citizens when the country was occupied had been interned in internment camps in Denmark under Danish supervision, but the general control of this supervision was in the hands of the authorities of the Plenipotentiary.
Q. In what direction did you develop your activities concerning interment camps?
A. A number of things had to be settled and directed. For instance, schooling for children of these internes, mail service that had to be discussed with the Danish authorities, religious ser vices, films, literature, and so on, - everything that concerned internment life.
It became even more topical, I think, in the spring of 1944 when camps had to be shifted and now it was necessary to find inhabitable areas.
Q. Didn't you have anything to do with Dr. Schirmer at the time and who was he?
A. Yes in 1944 these internment camps matters were dealt with by the Vice President of the Red Cross the Swiss gentleman Dr. Schirmer and I convened with Dr. Schirmer on various occasions d during a few days and talked matters over with him.
Q. Did he give any judgment concerning internment camps which you had under your supervision?
A. Yes. Dr. Schirmer, as well as the Danish authorities, always approved of my measures and Dr. Schirmer especially said that the supervision of these camps had been the best he had seen in Europe, the best of all the camps. Therefore, he approved explicitly of my measures.
Q. Did you not also have to deal extensively with seizures in Denmark?
A. Yes. That was within my assignment - to settle between the occupation power and the population, the claims and demands of the population. The occupation authorities, of course, needed apartments and offices and, of course, as is always the case, minor petty officials took very rigorous and inconsiderate measures and wherever I could I intervened and tried to settle the harshness and misunderstanding.
Q. Did you not also have to do with a certain actress Lulu Ziegler and did you help her to escape into a foreign country?
A. That is the following case of the Danish actress Lulu Ziegler, her husband, during the course of these arrests in the autumn of 1943, had also been arrested. He was suspected and accused of having indulged in Communistic activities, thus acting hostile to the German Reich.
She applied to the Plenipotenitary Dr. Best. Of course he knew her. So, I said, she applied and in the course of the investigation of these cases I came upon this particular case and I had to establish that there was nothing against her husband, nothing but the fact that years ago, about five or six years ago, he had on one occasion travelled to Moscow. According to the information of the Danish authorities he wasn't a Communist nor indulged in Communistic activities - far from it. I attempted to have him released.
Q. What was the attitude of the Danish population toward your activity?
A. Many Danes who had approached me, or who had been sent to me by the authorities, - from these many Danes I received letters of thanks on many occasions.
Q. And what impression did you have of your own activity in Denmark?
A. The activity in Denmark was for me very successful --psychologically, it was satisfactory, and, for the first time in yea rs, I felt that I was acting in a way which was satisfactory to myself.
Q. How did you leave Denmark, and when?
A. I left Denmark after the capitulation, following German directives which I had received, when the unit of my own office had to leave Denmark, and that was --BY THE PRESIDENT:
Q. Witness, you say you were quite happy with your services in Denmark, and you came away feeling that the Danish population were quite happy with your administration.
Have I understood you correctly?
A. Yes.
Q. And no one ever voiced any complaint about your occupation there -- to you?
A. Your Honor, you mean the occupation as such?
Q. Well, --- yes, you as a representative of the German occupation. If they were satisfied with you as a representative, then I presume you intend to convey the idea that they were satisfied with
A. I don't understand.
Q. Well, you have told us that the Danish people were quite happy with your administration in Denmark.
A. Yes, yes.
Q. They were happy to the extent that they came and thanked you, they wrote you letters, they sent you flowers. Is that right?
A. Yes, that's correct.
Q. Yes....now, do we gain from all this that the Danish people were very happy about their country being occupied by Germans?
A. No, that is not the case.
Q. Very well. Then you were the exception?
A. Not I, personally, was the exception, but I would say the authority, the office of the Plenipotentiary of the Reich and the population, - the line that was kept as far as administration goes, was only borne by the thought of the idea to settle any harshness that might have cropped up. After all, Your Honor, we were not at war with Denmark. They were conditions of occupation, and they were all regulated by contract, and it was our task, or at least we saw it as out task, to take care that the points of the contract were kept, also on the part of the occupation power, that was the German Wehrmacht and the German police.
Q. You were not at war with Denmark?
A. No.
Q. Well were you at war with Norway?
A. Yes.....there conditions were different.
Q.Were you at war with the Netherlands?
A. Yes.
Q. Were you at war with Belgium?
A. Yes.
Q. Well, how do you distinguish between Denmark and these other countries?
A. Your Honor, officially we were not at war with Denmark. When the occupation of the country took place......
Q. Were you officially at war with Holland?
A. As far as I know, yes.
Q. Well, distinguish to me between Denmark and the Netherlands-insofar as German official action is concerned.
A. I am not acquainted with conditions in the Netherlands, but in Denmark it was thus that as soon as the country was occupied --it wasn't that war was declared.
Q. Well, was war declared against any country -- with the exception of two or three? Was war declared against Russia?
A. Your Honor, that, of course, depended on the attitude of each individual country.
Q. Well, now, listen ... witness, the Tribunal has no desire at all to enter into any political discussion; but when you make a statement, then you must be prepared to explain it. If the statement seens in conflict with the general historical knowledge of any situation, then we must know whether you stand by that statement. That is the way we can determine the credibility of a witness. Now, you say that Germany was not at war with Denmark?
A. Yes.
Q. And you stand on that?
A. Yes.
Q. All right. Now, for the purpose of understanding why you make the remark, when history indicates that Germany invaded Denmark and performed all a nation does in the manner of waging a war in order to occupy and control a country, -- when you tell us that there was no state of war there, then we would like to have you tell us why you make that statement and differentiate between Denmark, which was invaded in the same way as Luxembourg? If you can make that distinction, tell us; if you cannot, say nothing, and we will pass to the next subject. Can you distinguish between the invasion of Denmark and the invasion of Luxembourg?
A. Yes.
Q. In a few words, tell us the distinction.
A. I see the difference in the following: In Denmark an independent government remained in force even after the occupation, an independent government, headed by the king. The entire administration of the country remained, and was, until 1945, Danish. In the other occupied territories it must have been different. I did not want to explain anything else, Your Honor...anything else, when I said that we were not at war with Denmark - which was the case, as the administrative structure.
Q. Very well. We only wanted an explanation as to why you came to that conclusion, and you have given us your explanation.
THE PRESIDENT: BY DR. RIEDIGER:
Q. Witness, what was your own attitude concerning the Jewish policy of National Socialism?
A. When I joined the NSDAP in 1937 I, as everybody else, did not think that any power acts would be carried out towards Jewry. Evidently, the years of distress after the first World War had opened up the question for some solution concerning the communal life -- a life, that is, of German citizens and Jewish citizens. As has been mentioned here before, the percentage of the Jewish element in public positions was in no relation of the Reich. If one wants to express it in that way now, the Jewish question did not exist, but nobody thought of using force in solving the problem. Added to this, during the post war years Jews immigrated, after 1918, into the Reich in great numbers, and also these Jews were soon in leading positions in German economic life and became very influential in these circles; and this of course, was regarded with dismay by the German citizens.
DR. RIEDIGER: Your Honor, I have the impression that Hannsch has not been able to follow, for quite some time now--and I would like to request that the session be interrupted now.
I have been aware of it for some time...that he has not been able to answer my questions, and I think that tomorrow morning he will be able to follow.
THE PRESIDENT: You would want us, then to recess because you fear that at the present moment the defendant Haensch is not in the best physical and mental state?
DR. RIEDIGER: Yes.
THE PRESIDENT: Very well, in view of that request made by Dr. Riediger, the Tribunal will now be in recess until tomorrow morning at nine-thirty o'clock.
(The Tribunal recessed until 0930 hours 3 December 1947.)
against Otto Ohlendorf, et al., defendants, sitting
THE MARSHAL: The Honorable, the Judges of Military Tribunal II. Tribunal.
DR. RIEDIGER: Your Honor, before I proceed with the direct examination of the witness, I would like to thank the Tribunal for stopping proceedings yesterday regarding the Defendant's bad state of health. The defense is in a very delicate and difficult position because even in the evening the witness was in a very bad mental state. The responsibility, of course, is a large one. I had the feeling all the time during the proceedings yesterday that the witness did not react properly and even today I have my doubts and almost misgivings, but I do not want to create the impression that the defense in any way whatsoever wants to interrupt the proceedings. Especially I do not want to create the impression that the witness wants to evade being questioned. the direct examination has been concluded, that the witness should be examined by a physician, as the result of this examination would clear up the state of health of the witness. I myself as a layman cannot take the responsibility and I cannot judge the state of health of the witness.
THE PRESIDENT: Your request, Dr. Riediger, is entirely a reasonable one and the Tribunal will be pleased to act upon it. You may now proceed with the direct examination, conclude it, and then in the meantime we will have had some COURT II CASE IX doctor prepared to examine the defendant just as soon as your examination is completed.
DR. RIEDIGER: Your Honor, if I may take the liberty to suggest that even the cross examination could be carried out later on, because I could imagine that if the physician examines the defendant immediately after his examination in Court he would get the proper picture concerning his state of health.
THE PRESIDENT: Well then, it is your recommendation that we proceed normally, you concluding the direct examination and Mr. Hochwald conducting the cross examination, and then we have the medical examination?
DR. RIEDIGER: Yes.
THE PRESIDENT: Very well. Proceed, Dr. Riediger. BY DR. RIEDIGER:
Q. Witness, we concluded yesterday's session with your attitude towards the Jewish question raised by National Socialism. How did the problems look regarded from your point of view?
A. I may say first that at that time, especially in 1933 and the years following 1933. I did not occupy myself immediately with the Jewish question. I want to say this for a possible clarification, but if I think back to that time then, I can only emphasize one thing again and again. The question was not so much in the foreground at that time when the power was taken over by the National Socialists and during the following years. At least it was not as important as it looks today. The matter which took up all our interest at the time was the elimination of unemployment and the attempt to get a new order, but I have already said COURT II CASE IX yesterday, the problem as such, that is, the Jewish problem, did exist, of course, insofar as after the last World War it had shown that the two parts of the population, the Jewish sector that is, and the Gentile sector in the Reich, came into collision with each other more and more, and this had as its reason in my opinion, the following:
After the last World War there was an especially strong immigration into the Reich from the East which now, in quite a disproportionate manner, took positions in public life.
Q. Did you discuss these matters at the time with Jews themselves?
A. Yes. Therefore, I remember it now; especially concerning the question of immigration after the last World War. I remember discussions in my own home town with a physician, Professor Klineberger, and I also had discussions with an old Jewish lady with whom I lived during my referendar period, a certain Mrs. Markus. It was in Leipzig. These two people by no means rejected this attitude that newly immigrated Jews, those who had immigrated after 1918, were in a certain way unjustified to occupy such posts in German public life of all spheres.
Q. How did you yourself react to these Jews and what was your attitude? Did you not on one occasion have to deal with one case in the RSHA, a case which dealt with an assessor and proceedings against him, who had illtreated Jews, and when was that, what year?
A. My attitude towards the Jewish question I adjusted according to the point of view of the entirety more than anything, and as becomes evident from the fact that I lived with this Mrs. Markus and that I and her other lodgers were on very good relationship with her, that shows, as I said, COURT II CASE IX that individual Jews I did not regard as enemies and I had never thought in any way of ill-treating them, and so exactly as in all other cases I tried to obtain order and cleanliness in the same way in my activity as an expert dealing with disciplinary matters in the RSHA at the time.
I, of course, took steps immediately in this particular case and I know that I was very much upset about this assessor, especially as he was a high official of a certain personal standard who had acted in this manner, I mean, had illtreated this Jew. Therefore, I proceeded according to my memory that must have been either the end of 1942 or at the beginning of 1943 -- in any case it was after I had returned from Russia and after I was again in charge of disciplinary matters, because I am sure that it was after the death of Heydrich.
Q. Excuse my interrupting you, witness, Could you not say clearly what the case was, what the facts were and what happened about this particular case?
A. A report had been received according to which a Jew had been illtreated in public by an official of the State Police office in Berlin. I remember that the report arrived and it had been sent off by officials of a newspaper who had, from the window or in any case from the building, observed and watched this action. The individual happenings I cannot remember today, but I immediately caused an investigation to be conducted against this person concerned; he was released immediately, and, I think, he was arrested. I don't quite remember how he was punished but I do know that at that time, I from a basic point of view advocated that for disciplinary reasons he should be released immediately. I don't know what the outcome was. As the man was an official he must have been dealt with by the disciplinary court.
Q. Witness, excuse me for interrupting you. The outcome of this procedure you do not know; did you never know?
A. I do not remember.
Q. Did you deal with this case personally?
A. It was dealt with in my office. I received that report. I took measures immediately and the matter itself was dealt with by one of my officials.
Q. Witness, please speak a little slower because the reporters can't follow.
A. I immediately initiated the investigation of this particular case and I immediately caused this man to be released, and then the case was dealt with in detail and examined and investigated by an official and government councillor (Regierungsrat) in my own department.
Q. Do you remember the name of the assessor concerned?
A. The assessor, that is, the official of the State Police office in Berlin who had illtreated the Jew, I do not remember. The official who dealt with the whole matter in detail must have been a Regierungsrat, either Regierungsrat Friedrich Schulz or Regierungsrat Fenz. Both these gentlemen were working in my office, but not at the same time. Friedrich Schulz was relieved and replaced. I don't know whether that was during the time of Schulz or Fenz.
Q. Witness, can you remember another case or a number of cases which show your attitude towards the Jewish question?
A. I can only say that when in Denmark, for instance, information was received that Danish citizens of Jewish faith, were to be deported to the Reich, we, and of course especially myself, were absolutely speechless and very much upset about it. I remember it so well because the office of the Reich Plenipotentiary had actually nothing to do with these matters and they did not learn about these things immediately, to begin with.
It was just an accident that one day through the visit of this well known actress, Lulu Ziegler, at my office, through this visit as I say, I found out that rumors circulated in Copenhagen to the effect that Danish Jews were to be deported to the Reich. I was speechless at the time and I did not believe it, that this actually was to happen.
Q. You just said "we were surprised about these measures". What did you mean?
A. Everybody was upset about it. I think there must have been few people perhaps who were of another opinion within the office of the Reich Plenipotentiary and the other offices; they were all who had experience in official and also worldly affairs.
Q. Did you discuss this with your superior at your office and who was the superior?
A. In Denmark, this bit of information which came as a surprise to me from Lulu Ziegler, I immediately passed on to the Reich Plenipotentiary, Dr. Best, and I think before I passed it on to my immediate superior, Dr. Staumann. I went into the office and.........
Q. What was the purpose of this visit of this actress? Did she have a special request?
A. That was in connection with her request and her wish. She applied to me, after her husband had been released, asking me whether she would not be permitted to go with her family......she had a number of children......to emigrate to Sweden. It would have been comparatively easy for her illegally, of course, but she emphasized that she did not want to do so and she asked me whether it would not be possible for me to do this officially for her.