## Facts

- The United States prosecuted 23 senior officials and directors of I.G. Farbenindustrie A.G. under Allied Control Council Law No. 10 before U.S. Military Tribunal VI (NMT Case No. 6).
- The indictment (filed May 3, 1947) alleged that the defendants, acting through I.G. Farben and otherwise, committed international crimes connected to Germany’s wartime conduct and occupation policies.
- The case proceeded as part of the Subsequent Nuremberg Trials; hearings ran from August 27, 1947, to June 10, 1948, and judgment issued July 29–30, 1948.
- I.G. Farben as a corporation was not indicted; the prosecution sought to impose individual criminal responsibility on executives and managers.
- The defendants were charged (in relevant part) with: (1) crimes against peace; (2) war crimes and crimes against humanity through plunder and spoliation in occupied territories; (3) war crimes and crimes against humanity through slave labor and related abuses, including the use of concentration camp prisoners at I.G. Auschwitz and associated sites; and (4) membership in criminal organizations for certain defendants, plus a conspiracy/common plan count.
- Evidence addressed (a) Farben’s role in rearmament and production essential to the German war economy; (b) acquisitions and control of assets in occupied territories; and (c) the procurement and use of forced labor, including concentration camp inmates, under inhumane conditions.

## Issues

1. Whether corporate executives and senior managers could be held individually criminally liable under Control Council Law No. 10 for crimes against peace based on participation in rearmament and wartime industrial planning.
2. Whether particular defendants knowingly and intentionally participated in plunder and spoliation of public or private property in occupied territories, constituting war crimes and/or crimes against humanity.
3. Whether particular defendants knowingly participated in enslavement and inhumane treatment through forced labor programs, including the use of concentration camp prisoners, constituting war crimes and/or crimes against humanity.
4. Whether the evidence established participation in a common plan or conspiracy to commit crimes against peace and related international crimes.
5. Whether defendants charged with membership in criminal organizations knowingly and voluntarily belonged to organizations previously declared criminal.

## Decision

- The tribunal acquitted all defendants on Count I (crimes against peace).
- The tribunal acquitted all defendants on Count V (common plan or conspiracy), treating it as dependent on proof of knowing participation in aggressive-war planning.
- The tribunal acquitted all defendants charged under Count IV (membership in criminal organizations).
- On Count II (plunder and spoliation), the tribunal convicted nine defendants: Hermann Schmitz, Georg von Schnitzler, Fritz ter Meer, Max Ilgner, Ernst Bürgin, Paul Haefliger, Friedrich Jähne, Heinrich Oster, and Hans Kugler.
- On Count III (slave labor and related crimes), the tribunal convicted five defendants for participation in forced labor involving I.G. Auschwitz and associated enterprises.
- Overall, 13 defendants were convicted on one or more counts and 10 were acquitted on all counts; one originally arraigned defendant was severed for health reasons.
- Sentences ranged from approximately 1.5 to 8 years’ imprisonment, with credit for time already served.

## Legal Principles

- Individual criminal liability for crimes against peace requires proof beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused knowingly participated in planning, preparing, initiating, or waging aggressive war; indispensable industrial contribution alone is insufficient without proof of the required mental element.
- A conspiracy or common-plan theory to commit crimes against peace fails where the prosecution does not prove knowing agreement and intent to further aggressive war.
- Plunder and spoliation in occupied territories constitute war crimes and may also constitute crimes against humanity where the conduct involves intentional, unlawful appropriation; liability turns on proof of active participation, knowledge, and intent in specific transactions or policies.
- Enslavement and inhumane treatment through systematic forced labor, including use of concentration camp prisoners, can constitute both war crimes and crimes against humanity; private economic motive does not negate criminality where defendants knowingly initiate, approve, or manage such labor schemes.
- “Superior orders” or state compulsion does not excuse executives who affirmatively seek out and implement forced-labor arrangements for corporate benefit.
- Membership-in-criminal-organization liability requires proof of voluntary, knowing membership meeting the applicable threshold for individual punishment.

## Conclusion

The tribunal limited crimes-against-peace liability for industrialists to cases with proof of knowing intent to further aggressive war, but imposed convictions for plunder and forced labor where executives were shown to have actively and knowingly participated in unlawful appropriation in occupied territories and in the deliberate exploitation of forced and concentration-camp labor.


United States v. Krauch (I.G. Farben Case), 8 Trials of War Criminals Before the Nuremberg Military Tribunals 1081 (U.S. Mil. Trib. VI 1952)