Here is the synopsis of our sample research paper on Reading: The Rule of Law and Military Tribunals
. Have the paper e-mailed to you 24/7/365.
Essay / Research Paper Abstract
This 3 page paper discusses a reading of the rule of law as applied to military tribunals, specifically the war crimes trials in Nuremberg, Germany, after WWII. The defense argued, among other things, that the tribunal itself was illegal because it charged the defendants under a law that did not exist at the time they committed their crimes. Bibliography lists 1 source.
Page Count:
3 pages (~225 words per page)
File: D0_HVNuberg.rtf
Buy This Term Paper »
Unformatted sample text from the term paper:
committed in the history of man. This paper discusses some of the points made in a reading entitled "The Rule of Law and Military Tribunals." Discussion The title of the
article gives the first point of discussion, the question of the difference between military tribunals and other courts. In the United States, the behavior of military personnel is governed by
the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ); it was created to define crimes that are unique to the military and the punishments for committing them. This of course is because
the military is a separate establishment and its members are often put in situations that would never occur in civilian life. But still, it is a system of law, and
its provisions are explained to every new recruit when they join the service. If a service member commits an act punishable under the UCMJ, he or she can expect to
find themselves in front of a court-martial or other proceeding. In 1945, however, the Allies found themselves with a dilemma: at trial, the evidence "implicated many of the defendants in
acts of systematic and deliberate barbarism" (What is law?, p. 16). There was no doubt that the Nazis were guilty of some of the most immoral atrocities ever committed, but
it was not enough for the Allies to condemn them morally: "... this was to be a legal proceeding, and the Nazis were therefore to be punished (if at all)
for having violated the law, however much what they did ... was regard by everyone involved as grossly immoral" (What is law?, p. 16). But the Nazis were not on
trial for immorality, they "were to be sent to prison-or to the hangman-for conduct that was illegal" and this is where the Nuremberg trials become extremely controversial (What is law?,
...