Les crimes de guerre constituent des violations graves du droit international pénal. Cependant, chaque nouveau conflit, qu'il ait un caractère international ou non, donne lieu à la perpétration de tels crimes. Pourquoi ? Y aurait-il des éléments prédisposant aux comportements de violence ? Le XXe siècle est le siècle de la justice internationale pénale caractérisée par la mise en place de tribunaux militaires internationaux après la découverte des atrocités de la Seconde Guerre mondiale, puis de tribunaux internationaux « ad hoc » pour se terminer par l'instauration d’une Cour internationale permanente en matière pénale. Les tribunaux ad hoc instaurés pour l’ex-Yougoslavie et pour le Rwanda ont permis que soient appliquées aux conflits armés non internationaux, les conventions internationales définissant les règles régissant les conflits armés internationaux. Quel a été l’impact de la jurisprudence de ces tribunaux sur la notion de crime de guerre ? Enfin, même si la mise en place de la Cour pénale internationale constitue un espoir dans la lutte contre l’impunité, son Statut souligne le difficile équilibre qu’elle opère entre la souveraineté des États et la volonté d’une justice universelle. Aux côtés de la justice institutionnelle est apparue la « justice transitionnelle », dont l’un des objectifs est de permettre la transition entre le temps de guerre et le temps de paix, dans les meilleures conditions possible, et ce, malgré les dilemmes auxquels elle doit faire face. Après tout, un retour rapide à une paix durable n’est-il pas préférable ? La justice transitionnelle nous emmène à nous poser la question suivante : faut-il juger ou pardonner les crimes de guerre ? / War crimes are serious violations of international criminal law. However, each new conflict, international or non-international, gives rise to the commission of war crimes. Why ? Does-it have factors that predispose to violent behaviours ? The 20th century is the century of international criminal law which is first characterized by the establishment of international military tribunals after the discovery of the atrocities of World War II, then international tribunals « ad hoc », eventually it ends by the introduction of an international criminal court. International Criminal Tribunals established for former Yugoslavia and Rwanda have permitted the application of International Conventions, defining armed conflict’s rules, to non-international armed conflicts. What was the impact of these tribunals’ case laws on war crime concept ? Eventually, even if the establishment of International Criminal Court gave hope to combat impunity, its status highlights the delicate balance between states’ sovereignty and the willingness of universal justice. Transitional justice was introduced to complete or to replace institutional justice in some cases. One of transitional justice’s objectives is to make a transition a transition between wartime and peacetime as smooth as possible even if many challenges remain. In fact, the fast restoration of lasting peace would it not be better ? The transitional justice leads us to wonder if we have to judge or forgive war crimes ?

Face aux préjudices irréparables engendrés par les crimes internationaux, le droit international, hormis les cas de poursuites devant la CPI et la pratique des commissions et fonds d'indemnisation des N.U, fait ponce-Pilate au droit interne pour la mise en oeuvre du droit à réparation des victimes de ces crimes. Une hypocrisie qui s'affirme notamment à travers des pratiques d'assistance humanitaire. Le droit interne des Etats quant à lui, fait un recours systématique à son système classique pour la mise en oeuvre de ce droit. Cet attrait pour le système classique tranche pourtant avec les facteurs matériels du droit en cette matière où le contexte des crimes, l'ampleur des préjudices, la vastitude des victimes et les fluctuations de la qualité des auteurs l'ont presque plongé dans la désuétude. C'est ce qui a fait émerger la quête d'un paradigme d'efficacité dont l'expérience de la justice transitionnelle et de la justice réparatrice constituent « l'essai ». La discussion sur l'efficacité des résultats de cet essai conduit l'observateur averti à la conclusion qu'il y a encore du chemin. Pour la RDC, contre l'aporie du droit classique face aux souffrances des victimes des crimes internationaux, cette étude propose la construction d'une politique criminelle basée sur une approche holistique de la réparation. L'approche holistique impliquant, ici, une réaction globaliste face aux préjudices subis par les victimes des crimes internationaux. Préjudices multiformes pour lesquels les réponses en termes de réparation doivent relever d'une appréhension globale du droit, reposant sur l'interdisciplinarité et l'ouverture à la « technologie sociale ». / Faced with the irreparable prejudices arising from international crimes, except for the cases being prosecuted at the ICC and the processes of various Commissions and reparations funds of the UN, international law has been pontius-pilating when it comes implementing under domestic laws the rights of victims to reparations. This hypocrisy is particularly highlighted by the use of humanitarian aid. Domestic laws have systematically resorted to traditional practices to implement this right. This inclination towards traditional approaches is indeed at variance with the material elements of the law on reparations in as much as the context of the crimes, the scope of the damage, the vast number of victims and fluctuations in the types of perpetrators have simply made the traditional systems obsolete. Whence the quest for an efficiency paradigm hinged on «attempts» within transitional justice and reparations justice. Analyses of these attempts by experts reveal that a lot still has to be done. In the case of the DRC, and mindful of the shortcomings of the traditional legal system in mitigating the suffering of victims of international crimes, this study proposes a holistic approach to the development of a criminal reparations policy. This holistic approach requires a global response to the damage suffered by victims of international crimes. The reparations response to these multidimensional prejudices must reflect a global understanding of the law based on interdisciplinary and «social technology» considerations.

Esta dissertação se dedica ao estudo do Direito à Memória e à Verdade enquanto um dos seis eixos estruturadores do 3º Programa Nacional Direitos Humanos (PNDH-3). O trabalho tem por objetivo identificar e analisar as contribuições e as lacunas que o Programa reforça junto à luta por memória, verdade e justiça no Brasil. Conduzo esta pesquisa a partir do estudo sobre o processo de inclusão e revisão do Direito à Memória e à Verdade no PNDH-3, avaliando seus avanços e recuos no tratamento da questão das reparações aos crimes da ditadura (1964-1985). Com a sistematização do processo de inclusão do Direito à Memória e à Verdade discuto de que forma a Lei da Anistia, enquanto instrumento de garantia da imunidade dos militares após o fim do regime, tem implicações no alcance das atuais políticas de reparação do país. Em um segundo momento, é feita a interpretação documental do texto do Programa, visando compreender o que cada uma das suas três diretrizes propõe e quais objetivos elas alcançam dentro dos preceitos da justiça de transição. Por fim, ao cruzar os desafios e recuos enfrentados pelo PNDH-3 durante o seu processo de revisão (iniciado em dezembro de 2009 e concluído em maio de 2010), busco refletir sobre as dificuldades da construção do Direito à Memória e à Verdade como instrumento de reparação no governo Lula (2003-2010). Esse estudo permite analisar os instrumentos utilizados pelo Estado brasileiro no processo de reparação aos crimes praticados durante a ditadura e problematizar como se constrói a política de memória no país a partir também das demandas não incluídas na agenda governamental. Com este trabalho viso contribuir com a reflexão histórica sobre esse processo reparatório de modo a inserir o PNDH-3 em um quadro mais amplo de políticas de Estado a partir dos conceitos de justiça de transição e política de memória. / This dissertation is dedicated to the study of the Right to Memory and Truth (Direito à Memória e à Verdade - DMV) as one of the six structuring axis of the 3rd Human Rights National Program (3º Programa Nacional Direitos Humanos - PNDH-3). The work aims at identifying and analysing the contributions and the gaps that the Program reinforces in relation to the struggle for memory, truth and justice in Brazil. I conduct this research departing from the study of the process of inclusion and revision of the Right to Memory and Truth in the PNDH-3, evaluating its progresses and drawbacks regarding the treatment of the issue of reparation to the crimes committed by the dictatorship (1964-1985). Through the systematization of the process of inclusion of the DMV, I discuss, as background, how the Amnesty Law, as an instrument that has guaranteed the immunity of the military after the end of the regime, has implications for achieving the current reparation policies in the country. In a second moment, the documental interpretation of the Program\'s text is undertaken, envisioning the comprehension of what is proposed by its three guidelines and which objectives those guidelines reach within the precepts of transitional justice. Finally, whilst crossing the challenges and retreats faced by the PNDH-3 during its revision process (initiated in December 2009 and concluded in May 2010) I seek to reflect about the difficulties of the construction of the Right to Memory and Truth as a reparation instrument during Lula\'s administration (2003-2010). This study enables the analysis of the instruments deployed by the Brazilian State for the reparation of its crimes committed during the dictatorship. Moreover, it makes possible to problematize how the politics of memory in the country is also constructed through demands that are not included in the governmental agenda. Through this work I aim at contributing for the historical reflection regarding the reparatory process, thus, inserting the PNDH-3 in a broader picture of State policies departing from concepts of transitional justice and politics of memory.

Ce travail se penche sur le conflit de mémoires, les usages et les projets autour de l’immeuble de l’ancien Departamento de Ordem Política e Social (DOPS), dans le cadre du processus de ce qu’on appelle la justice transitionnelle au Brésil. Le centre de l’étude est la dynamique de la dispute pour ce lieu de mémoire, dans le contexte des luttes sociales menées par des ex-prisonniers politiques et des parents des morts et des disparus de la dictature militaire (1964-1985). La confrontation entre les projets “Espaço Cultural Memória e Direitos Humanos” et “Museu da Polícia Civil” en révèle les enjeux symboliques, idéologiques et pédagogiques. En outre, le travail expose et questionne les fonctions imparties à la police politique dans la structure de l’appareil répressif de la dictature, et à la police civile dans la sécurité publique en situation démocratique au Brésil. / This work approaches the dispute of memories, uses and projects surrounding the building of the former Departamento de Ordem Política e Social – DOPS (Department of Political and Social Order) within the framework of the process of so-called transitional justice in Brazil. The focus of the work is the dynamics of the conflict for the site of memory in the context of social struggles carried out by ex-political prisoners and relatives of the dead and disappeared of the military dictatorship (1964-1985). The confrontation between the projects "Espaço Cultural Memória e Direitos Humanos” (Memory and Human Rights Cultural Space) and “Museu da Polícia Civil" (Museum of Civil Police) reveals what is at stake in symbolic, ideological and pedagogical terms. It is presented and problematized the place occupied by the political police in the structure of the repressive apparatus of the dictatorship, as well as by the Civil Police in the public security of democracy situation in Brazil. / Este trabalho aborda a disputa de memórias, usos e projetos entorno do edifício do antigo Departamento de Ordem Política e Social (DOPS) no quadro do processo da chamada justiça transicional no Brasil. O foco do trabalho é a dinâmica do conflito pelo lugar de memória no contexto das lutas sociais protagonizadas por ex-presos políticos e familiares de mortos e desaparecidos da ditadura militar (1964-1985). O confronto entre os projetos “Espaço Cultural Memória e Direitos Humanos” e “Museu da Polícia Civil” revela o que está em jogo em termos simbólicos, ideológicos e pedagógicos. É apresentado e problematizado o lugar ocupado pela polícia política na estrutura do aparato repressivo da ditadura, assim como pela Polícia Civil na segurança pública em situação de democracia no Brasil.

Pourquoi certains crimes d’État ou de masse sont-ils jugés au sortir d’un régime autoritaire ou d'une guerre civile, tandis que d'autres épisodes de violence voient leur traitement judiciaire en suspens ? Pourquoi passe-t-on parfois par des procédures ou institutions dites de « réconciliation » ? Ces dernières constituent-elles des formes de contournement de la justice ? La thèse tente de répondre à ces questions à l'aune d'un cas de violence survenu en 1984 en Indonésie. Tranchant avec un climat national souvent qualifié d'impunité des auteurs suspectés de violations graves passées, la « tragédie de Tanjung Priok » n'est pas restée sans suites. En 2003, cinq années après la démission de Suharto, quelque quinze militaires qui avaient été déployés sur les lieux lors du massacre furent jugés pour « crimes contre l'humanité » devant un tribunal national ad hoc des droits de l’homme. Or, une charte de « réconciliation », dite charte d'ishlah, se référant au droit islamique, signée avant le procès par les accusés et une partie des victimes, a déclenché une controverse et suscité l'embarras des acteurs institutionnels. Pour comprendre les enjeux de cette « réconciliation », ce travail fait dialoguer une revue comparative des mécanismes de justice transitionnelle à l'échelle internationale, avec un portrait de l'Indonésie en transition et une reconstitution historique des scènes-clés et polémiques ayant marqué l'ensemble d'une l'affaire qui s'étend sur plus de vingt ans. La thèse se démarque des descriptions surplombantes des lendemains de violence en insistant sur les dynamiques locales à l’œuvre sur une temporalité longue, à partir de sources variées (entretiens, tracts, procès, presse), depuis la contestation souterraine de la violence sous Suharto jusqu'aux années 2000. L'approche ici développée se distingue néanmoins des analyses centrées sur le déterminisme des structures pour mettre en lumière les effets de concaténation générés par la mondialisation des pratiques de justice transitionnelle. / Why are some state or mass crimes judged in courts after a civil war or the fall of an authoritarian regime, while other episodes of violence see their judicial treatment suspended ? Why do they sometimes go through so-called “reconciliation” procedures or institutions? Are these forms of circumvention of justice ? This thesis is an attempt to answer these questions in the light of a case of violence in 1984 in Indonesia. In full contrast with a national climate often referred to as impunity of suspected perpetrators of serious past violations since the transition, the “tragedy of Tanjung Priok” has not remained without judicial consequences after the fall of Suharto in 1998. In 2003, about fifteen soldiers who were deployed on the scene during the bloody events were charged and tried for “crimes against humanity” before a national ad hoc human rights court. However, a charter of “reconciliation”, called ishlah charter, referring to Islamic law, signed before the trial between suspected perpetrators and some of the victims sparked off a controversy and the embarrassment of institutional actors. To understand the stakes of this “reconciliation”, this work makes an extensive review of the evolutions of transitional justice mechanisms on an international scale dialogue with a portrait of Indonesia in transition and a historical reconstitution of the key scenes and the controversies that have arisen over the course of this whole affair, which extends over more than twenty years. Thus, this thesis departs from disembodied descriptions of post-violence in order to insist on local dynamics at work on a long temporality, this being based on manifold sources (interviews, tracts, trials, press), from underground contests of State violence during Suharto's era up to the 2000s. Yet, it should also be distinguished from analysis in terms of determinism of structures and, conversely, puts the stress on the concatenation effects generated by the globalization of practices of transitional justice.

This dissertation answers the question of what the proper balance is for victims with respect to the formation of a truth or truth and reconciliation commission that is formed to address the aftermath of an authoritarian regime or armed conflict. A review of the historical operation of entities that have operated in the aftermath of authoritarian regimes and armed conflict is conducted in this dissertation. From the Nuremberg and Tokyo trials to the present day, nations have struggled to try to devise a systematic way to deal with the aftermath of harm caused to victims as a consequence of authoritarian regimes and armed conflict. An examination of the various past truth and reconciliation commissions, the International Criminal Court, and various treaties is here juxtaposed with the Colombian Justice and Peace program implemented a decade ago to bring about peace and reconciliation in Colombia. This dissertation concludes that an entity formed with the purpose of achieving the proper balance for victims of an authoritarian regime or armed conflict, must have a truth-telling component that works in tandem with a specialized court conceived with the objective of operating alongside the commission. Thus, while there is a punitive aspect, the focus is more on the relationship between the events, solutions, and relief provided for victims. An entity with such a focus has various components, including truth-telling and some form of sanction or punishment, but always with the betterment of the past, present, and future victims as well as the subject society or country as its priority. In that vein, a set of proposed flexible guidelines are presented as the culmination of this dissertation. The flexible guidelines proposed here set forth a balanced system between the commission and the court that will provide for both punishment and reconciliation for particular countries and the victims. / Includes bibliography. / Dissertation (Ph.D.)--Florida Atlantic University, 2015. / FAU Electronic Theses and Dissertations Collection

A pesquisa analisa os discursos e as representações sociais mobilizadas na abordagem de certo segmento midiático brasileiro – as revistas semanais de informação geral CartaCapital, Época, IstoÉ e Veja – às atividades da Comissão Nacional da Verdade (CNV), entre maio de 2012 e dezembro de 2014. Essas publicações alinham-se a diferentes posicionamentos político-ideológicos e ao mesmo tempo influenciam e reproduzem, em maior ou menor grau, o debate político nacional dentro e fora das instituições oficiais. O objetivo é discutir a temática dos direitos humanos a partir da questão da memória e da verdade, operada mediante mecanismos de justiça de transição engendrados após traumas políticos como a ditadura brasileira 1964-1985 – regime para o qual parte da mídia nacional prestou apoio. Além de um exame panorâmico do corpus de 240 textos que tratam da CNV (temas orbitais abordados, distribuição dos textos no tempo e sob as diferentes coordenações do colegiado, comparação com a cobertura da mídia em geral), utiliza-se o instrumental teórico-metodológico das representações sociais e da análise de discurso de matriz francesa, com especial atenção à noção de formação discursiva e à construção do discurso midiático, para esmiuçar uma amostra de 20 matérias ilustrativas das diferentes fases narrativas da cobertura das revistas. Observa-se nesse recorte uma marcada dicotomização das representações sobre a questão da memória e da verdade. Essas representações expressam posicionamentos divergentes quanto à relação entre verdade e justiça dentro do processo justransicional brasileiro, com reflexos diretos sobre as possibilidades de alcance da reconciliação nacional – um dos objetivos expressos pelo Estado com a criação da Comissão. Essa divisão remete também a debates travados internacionalmente no campo da justiça de transição, em que se contrap / The research analyzes discourses and social representations mobilized in the approach of certain Brazilian media segment – such as weekly magazines of general information CartaCapital, Época, IstoÉ and Veja – over the activities of the National Commission of Truth (CNV, in Portuguese), between May 2012 and December 2014. These publications are in line with different political-ideological positions and at once influence to and reproduce the political debate inside and outside the official institutions. The objective is to discuss human rights based on the issue of memory and truth, operated through transitional justice mechanisms engendered to deal with consequences of political traumas such as the Brazilian dictatorship 1964-1985 – a regime for which part of the national media provided support. In addition to a panoramic examination of the corpus of 240 texts referring CNV (orbital themes covered, temporal distribution of the texts, comparison with media coverage in general), it is analysed a sample of 20 texts representing the different narrative phases of magazine coverage, for what is fundamental the theoretical and methodological contribution from social representations theory and French discourse analysis, specially the notion of discursive formation and the construction of the media discourse. In this setting of texts is observed a remarkable dichotomization of representations on the issue of memory and truth. These representations express divergent positions regarding the relationship between truth and justice in the Brazilian Transitional Justice, with direct effects on the possibilities of national reconciliation – one of the CNV‟s objectives. This division: also refers to debates in the field of transitional justice around the world, in which an idealist, universalizing, punitive, and another realist, contextualizing, appeasing, positions are opposed; is intensified by ideological disputes

La question de la justice dans les sociétés en transition est systématiquement soulevée après un conflit ou une période répressive ou autoritaire. En effet, les violations flagrantes du droit international des droits de l’homme et les violations graves du droit international humanitaire perpétrées sous les précédents régimes ne sauraient laisser aux institutions politiques nouvelles le choix de l’inaction face au passé. Les commissions vérité et réconciliation constituent un des mécanismes de la justice transitionnelle qui place la victime au cœur de ses préoccupations notamment parce que l’incrimination du bourreau n’est pas le seul objectif de la justice et que, comme le remarquait Hannah Arendt, il faut bien constater qu’il y a « des crimes qu’on ne peut ni punir, ni pardonner ». Parfois présentées comme une solution alternative à la justice pénale, ces commissions ont pour objectif d’établir les méfaits des anciens régimes. Le possible choix entre les commissions vérité et la justice répressive interne ou internationale est écarté dans cette étude qui entend accorder une place importante à la complémentarité des commissions vérité et réconciliation avec les autres mécanismes de la justice transitionnelle, notamment les poursuites judiciaires contre les auteurs des crimes de droit international les plus graves et les réparations pour les victimes. De fait, le but de cette étude n’est pas d’analyser de manière isolée ces commissions mais de constater que les normes internationales et la situation propre à chaque pays en transition limitent les options disponibles du traitement du passé. La recherche est fondée sur la méthode d'étude de cas de plusieurs pays dans une démarche comparative afin d’en tirer des conclusions aboutissant à démontrer la légitimité des commissions vérité et réconciliation en période de transition ainsi que leur fonctionnement. / The issue of justice in societies in transition is systematically raised after a conflict, a repressive period or an authoritarian period. Gross violations of international human rights law and grave breaches of international humanitarian law perpetrated under previous regimes cannot let the choice of inaction concerning the past to the new political institutions.Truth and reconciliation commissions constitute one of the mechanisms of transitional justice, which place the victim at the middle of its concerns especially because the criminalization of perpetrators is not the only goal of justice and, as noted by Hannah Arendt, “men are unable to forgive what they cannot punish and are unable to punish what turns out to be unforgivable”. Sometimes presented as an alternative mean to criminal justice, these commissions aim to establish the misdeeds committed by former regimes. The possible choice between truth commissions and international or internal criminal Justice is avoided in this study, which aims to highlight the important role of the complementarity of truth and reconciliation commissions with other transitional justice mechanisms, notably legal prosecutions against the perpetrators of crimes against international law and reparations for victims. In this regard, the aim of this study is not to analyze these commissions in an isolated manner, but to notice that international standards as well as situations in each country restrict the options available for dealing with the past. This research is based on a comparative approach presenting a case study on different countries for demonstrate the legitimacy of truth and reconciliation commissions and their functioning in period of transition.

Esta dissertação se dedica ao estudo do Direito à Memória e à Verdade enquanto um dos seis eixos estruturadores do 3º Programa Nacional Direitos Humanos (PNDH-3). O trabalho tem por objetivo identificar e analisar as contribuições e as lacunas que o Programa reforça junto à luta por memória, verdade e justiça no Brasil. Conduzo esta pesquisa a partir do estudo sobre o processo de inclusão e revisão do Direito à Memória e à Verdade no PNDH-3, avaliando seus avanços e recuos no tratamento da questão das reparações aos crimes da ditadura (1964-1985). Com a sistematização do processo de inclusão do Direito à Memória e à Verdade discuto de que forma a Lei da Anistia, enquanto instrumento de garantia da imunidade dos militares após o fim do regime, tem implicações no alcance das atuais políticas de reparação do país. Em um segundo momento, é feita a interpretação documental do texto do Programa, visando compreender o que cada uma das suas três diretrizes propõe e quais objetivos elas alcançam dentro dos preceitos da justiça de transição. Por fim, ao cruzar os desafios e recuos enfrentados pelo PNDH-3 durante o seu processo de revisão (iniciado em dezembro de 2009 e concluído em maio de 2010), busco refletir sobre as dificuldades da construção do Direito à Memória e à Verdade como instrumento de reparação no governo Lula (2003-2010). Esse estudo permite analisar os instrumentos utilizados pelo Estado brasileiro no processo de reparação aos crimes praticados durante a ditadura e problematizar como se constrói a política de memória no país a partir também das demandas não incluídas na agenda governamental. Com este trabalho viso contribuir com a reflexão histórica sobre esse processo reparatório de modo a inserir o PNDH-3 em um quadro mais amplo de políticas de Estado a partir dos conceitos de justiça de transição e política de memória. / This dissertation is dedicated to the study of the Right to Memory and Truth (Direito à Memória e à Verdade - DMV) as one of the six structuring axis of the 3rd Human Rights National Program (3º Programa Nacional Direitos Humanos - PNDH-3). The work aims at identifying and analysing the contributions and the gaps that the Program reinforces in relation to the struggle for memory, truth and justice in Brazil. I conduct this research departing from the study of the process of inclusion and revision of the Right to Memory and Truth in the PNDH-3, evaluating its progresses and drawbacks regarding the treatment of the issue of reparation to the crimes committed by the dictatorship (1964-1985). Through the systematization of the process of inclusion of the DMV, I discuss, as background, how the Amnesty Law, as an instrument that has guaranteed the immunity of the military after the end of the regime, has implications for achieving the current reparation policies in the country. In a second moment, the documental interpretation of the Program\'s text is undertaken, envisioning the comprehension of what is proposed by its three guidelines and which objectives those guidelines reach within the precepts of transitional justice. Finally, whilst crossing the challenges and retreats faced by the PNDH-3 during its revision process (initiated in December 2009 and concluded in May 2010) I seek to reflect about the difficulties of the construction of the Right to Memory and Truth as a reparation instrument during Lula\'s administration (2003-2010). This study enables the analysis of the instruments deployed by the Brazilian State for the reparation of its crimes committed during the dictatorship. Moreover, it makes possible to problematize how the politics of memory in the country is also constructed through demands that are not included in the governmental agenda. Through this work I aim at contributing for the historical reflection regarding the reparatory process, thus, inserting the PNDH-3 in a broader picture of State policies departing from concepts of transitional justice and politics of memory.

After much debate during the war years over how best to respond to Nazi criminality, the United States embarked on an ambitious postwar trial program in occupied Germany, which consisted of three distinct trial sets: the International Military Trial at Nuremburg, the Nuremberg Military Tribunals, and military trials held at the former concentration camp at Dachau. Within the Dachau military tribunal programme, were the concentration camp trials in which personnel from the Dachau, Mauthausen, Buchenwald, Flossenbürg, and Dora-Mittelbau concentration camps were arraigned. These concentration camp trials at Dachau represented the principal attempt by the United States to punish Nazi crimes committed at the concentration camps liberated by the Americans. The prosecutors at Dachau tried 1,045 defendants accused of committing violations of the 'laws of war' as understood through 'customary' international and American military practice. The strain of using traditional military law to prosecute the unprecedented crimes in the Nazi concentration camps was exposed throughout the trials. To meet this challenge, the Dachau concentration camp courts included an inventive legal concept: the use of a 'criminal-conspiracy' charge-in effect arraigning defendants for participating the 'common design' of the concentration camp, 'a criminal organization'. American lawmakers had spent a good deal of time focused on the problem of how to begin the trials (What charges? What courts? Which defendants?) and very little time planning for the aftermath of the trials. Thus, by 1947 and 1948, in the face of growing tensions between the United States and the Soviet Union, the major problem with the Dachau trials was revealed -the lack of long term plans for the appellate process for those convicted. After two scandals that captured the press and the public's attention, the United States Congress held two official investigations of the entire Dachau tribunal programme. Although the resulting reviews, while critical of the Army's clemency process, were largely positive about the trials themselves, the Dachau trials faded from public memory.