## Facts

- On March 13–14, 1944, German submarine U-852, commanded by Kapitänleutnant Heinz Eck, torpedoed the *Peleus*, an Allied merchant ship, in the Atlantic.
- The *Peleus* sank quickly, and surviving crew members escaped onto life rafts and floating wreckage.
- After the sinking, U-852 surfaced and a survivor was questioned about the ship’s identity and voyage.
- Eck then ordered his crew to fire on the survivors and the rafts and to throw grenades at those in the water.
- Several crew members carried out the attacks, including officers; at least one subordinate stated he disagreed with the order but still shot at survivors.
- The submarine’s medical officer also fired at the survivors despite knowing German naval rules restricted medical officers from using weapons for offensive action.
- Only three *Peleus* crew members survived; they remained at sea for about 25 days before rescue and later testified about the attack.
- Eck and four subordinates were jointly charged with a war crime for being concerned in the killing of the shipwrecked survivors by firing and throwing grenades at them.
- Eck admitted issuing the order but argued it was given to remove evidence of the sinking and protect the submarine from discovery; the subordinates argued they acted under superior orders.

## Issues

1. Whether intentionally firing on and throwing grenades at shipwrecked survivors of a torpedoed merchant vessel violates the laws and usages of war at sea and constitutes a war crime.
2. Whether a commander’s claim of “operational necessity” (to avoid detection by eliminating traces of the sinking) can justify killing survivors.
3. Whether superior orders provide a complete defense for subordinate crew members who participated in the killings.
4. Whether the principle of legality (*nulla poena sine lege*) bars conviction where the prohibition is based on customary laws of war and recognized authorities rather than a single specific written rule.
5. Whether the accused lacked the required guilty intent because the acts were said to be driven by military considerations rather than malice.

## Decision

- The British Military Court (Hamburg) found that the deliberate killing of shipwrecked survivors by machine-gun fire and grenades after the sinking of the *Peleus* was a war crime.
- The court rejected Eck’s argument that operational security concerns could justify killing survivors to remove evidence and reduce the risk of detection.
- The court rejected superior orders as a complete defense for the subordinates, though compliance could be considered in mitigation.
- The court rejected the legality objection, treating the prohibition as part of binding laws and usages of war and sufficiently known through recognized sources (including military manuals and prior decisions on attacks on lifeboats and survivors).
- The accused were convicted; Eck and some co-accused received death sentences, while others received terms of imprisonment.

## Legal Principles

- Intentionally killing or attempting to kill shipwrecked survivors of a sunken vessel is prohibited by the laws and usages of war at sea and may be prosecuted as a war crime.
- Claimed operational necessity to protect a submarine or to eliminate evidence of a sinking does not justify killing persons who are hors de combat in the water or on rafts.
- Superior orders are not a complete defense to participation in manifestly unlawful killings, though they may affect punishment.
- The principle of legality does not prevent conviction where the conduct is clearly forbidden by customary laws of war recognized through accepted statements of the law (such as military manuals) and prior authoritative decisions.
- Intent may be inferred from deliberate use of lethal weapons directed at helpless survivors and their means of survival and rescue.

## Conclusion

In *In re Eck and Others (The Peleus)*, a British Military Court held that machine-gunning and grenading shipwrecked survivors after the torpedoing of the *Peleus* was a war crime; neither operational security arguments nor superior orders excused criminal responsibility, and the customary laws of war provided a sufficient legal basis to convict the commander and participating crew members.


In re Eck and Others (The Peleus), 13 Am. Dig. (1945)