 |
exercise of such initiative. The majority concedes such initiative to
have existed at Auschwitz, as it was planned from the inception of the Farben
Auschwitz buna plant to use concentration-camp labor on the project. I consider
it unreasonable to conclude that these plans were not known by all Vorstand
members. The majority opinion recognizes that Duerrfeld, Ambros, Krauch, ter
Meer, and Buetefisch must bear responsibility for taking the initiative in the
unlawful employment of forced workers at Auschwitz, and that they, to some
extent at least, must share the responsibility for the mistreatment of the
workers with the SS and the construction contractors. The criminal
responsibility so found should embrace all Vorstand members for the occurrences
at Auschwitz. With regard to the numerous other plants in which slave labor was
employed by Farben, no substantial factual distinction exists from that
prevailing at Auschwitz, in the matter of cooperative attitude.
As to
the employment of forced workers at Auschwitz after the Sauckel program of
forced labor became effective, the majority opinion states: |
| |
“The defendants contend
that, the recruitment of labor being under direct control of the Reich, they
did not know the conditions under which the recruitment took place, and since
the foreign workers at first were procured on a voluntary basis, the defendants
were unaware later that the method had been changed and that many of the
subsequent workers had been procured through a system of forced-labor
recruitment. This contention cannot be successfully maintained. The labor for
Auschwitz was procured through the Reich Labor Office at Farben's request.
Forced labor was used for a period of approximately 3 years, from 1942 until
the end of the war. It is clear that Farben did not prefer either the
employment of concentration-camp workers or those foreign nationals who had
been compelled against their will to enter German labor service. On the other
hand, it is equally evident that Farben accepted the situation that was
presented to it through the Labor Office of the Reich and that when free
workers, either German or foreigners, were unobtainable, they sought the
employment and utilization of people who came to them through the services of
the concentration camp Auschwitz and Sauckel’s forced-labor program.”
|
| The foregoing analysis of the responsibility for utilization of
forced labor at Auschwitz is equally applicable to slave-labor utilization at
the other Farben plants where the situation was identical in fact. Willing
cooperation with the slave-labor utilization of the Third Reich was a matter of
corporate policy that permeated the whole Farben organization. The Vorstand was
responsible for the policy. For this reason, criminal responsibility goes
beyond the actual immediate |
1312 |
. 
