The Truth Behind The Testimony to the Tokyo Trial, Of Pu Yi, the Last Emperor of “China”

Two Copies of From Emperor to Citizen: The Autobiography of Aisin-Gioro Pu Yi

From Emperor to Citizen

(Right: Published by Oxford University Press,1987. Left: By Foreign Language Press, Beijing, China, 1989)

It is most important to get the edition that has W.J.F. Jenner’s introductions and S. Winchester’s Afterword (one in the right) rather than the editions by Foreign Language Press, Beijing (left), if one really wants to know what happened to Pu Yi, the last emperor of China, because those Beijing editions were published under tight control of the Communist Party Propaganda Department.

In the version of 1987 from Oxford University Press, Jenner, who in 1964 originally translated this “autobiography” of the Last Emperor entrusted by the Foreign Language Press, revealed such a great deal of truths behind the publication of this book.

His and his co-editor’s additional words have been omitted from the later editions by Foreign Language Press, as a matter of course.

Many left-wing scholars and journalists have advocated to us that, by the great “thought reform programme” and the “generosity policy” of the Chinese Communist Party, Pu Yi was “re-educated” perfectly and dramatically from an arrogant little tyrant in the Forbidden City to a decent able worker of acquired communism mind.

However, in fact, that is not true at all.

According to [the fourth wife of Pu Yi’s] published account, she found his mouthing of progressive cliches hard to take when he showed hardly any interest in how she had coped during the intervening ten years.” (She had not been informed his where-about until then.)

Even as late as 1961, two years after Pu Yi’s release from the prison, when she had finally got divorce Pu Yi and remarried and had a son, “there was still pressure on her to drop everything and start looking after Pu Yi again, as he was incapable of looking after himself. [……] Even his much-publicised labour in the Botanical Gardens outside Peking was something of a ritual.

” Pu Yi’s final marriage to the fifth wife, who was well-qualified and experienced nurse, was “arranged for him by the Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference and the Communist Party’s United Front Department.”

Pu Yi Was Propaganda Puppet for the Communist Party of China

“By 1955,” Jenner writes, “the authorities had evidently decided that Pu Yi was by now useful for propaganda purposes. [……] Pu Yi’s presentation to foreigners as a living advertisement for the People’s Government and the Communist Party began in 1956, while he was still in prison; and after his release he was often required to meet foreign visitors to China.”

He survived the stormy Cultural Revolution not because he became a model citizen and a Communist Party member, but because of “Chou En-lai’s intervention, and [because] the local police kept Red Guards away.”

As for the “generosity policy” for which Pu Yi and the Japanese inmates expressed their gratefulness, again, it was a mere part of the “thought reform programme”.

Jenner writes; “The special consideration shown Pu Yi and other high-ranking Manchukuo (sic), Japanese, and Nationalist officials cannot be regarded as typical of Chinese prison conditions. These were all people of potential value in winning over others in future, and political considerations saved them from the harsh justice that many lesser figures received.”

According to Chu Ch’u and Hsu Tse, the ex-vice governor and the ex-warder of the Fushun War Criminal Camp, respectively, they actually protested to the prison authority that the treatment they were told to give to the Manchus and the Japanese was too generous.

The Order was to give them good foods in good amount and good care for their health. No abusive words and no tortures should be given to those “special prisoners”.

The authority explained; It was the policy of the Chairman Mao and the Premier Chou.
Mao and Chou ordered to transfer those Manchus and the randomly selected Japanese who had been kept in slave labour camps in Siberia to China in July 1950.

The initial order was from Stalin himself. The “Brain-Washing Programme” was designed in Russia first. They experimented with the PoWs in Siberia as well.

“To be honest,” Chu Ch’u says, “it was only when I heard of those Japanese inmates who were returned to Japan by “amnesty” and formed “the Association of Returnees from China (Chuugoku-Kikansha-Renraku-Kai in Japanese)” and have been confessing to the public their “crimes” for the anti-war campaign, I actually realised the true intention of the Premier Chou.”

Thought Reform and Psychology of Totalism

“Thought Reform and the Psychology of Totalism: A Study of ‘Brainwashing’ in China” by Robert J. Lifton (pub.1961) reveals that “brainwash” treatment for other prisoners of other prison camps similar to Fushun who were not either Manchu or Japanese were severe. Physical and psychological tortures were used to force “self-education” “self-criticism”and “self-condemnation”.

However, it is not that there were no coercion towards those “special prisoners”.
Let us not forget that those Manchus and Japanese had been kept in unimaginably harsh condition of Siberian slave labour camps for good 5 years before they were transferred to China.

According to the above-mentioned ex-officers of Fushun Camp, the prisoners seemed to have lost their sound mental health already at that point of transportation to China in 1950.

After that until their deliberate release in late 50’s, while being not allowed to receive any visitors from outside, they were kept in silent but severe psychological coercion; homesickness.

The prison officers and inmate leaders of the “education group” kept telling them that only when they “recognise their horrible crimes and confess them in front of everybody to become a good person and good communist” they would be able to go home to see their beloved families and friends.

Many of members of the “Association of Returnees from China” admit that they did “confess” those barbaric crimes like “Rape of Nanking” and biological experiments of “Unit 731” and “Three All Policy” just because they wanted to come home.

They Did It in Their So-Called “Creative Activity”.

Their “confessions” were published after translated in Chinese and kept in the Social Science Institution in Beijing.

What Chinese scholars have been using as “historical material” when they research “Japanese Army’s atrocities in the Sino-Japanese war of 1937-1945” are those “confessions”.

Their works have been regarded as genuine scholarly researches by Western scholars. Now you can see where the fundamental problem lies.

True Meaning of Tokyo Trial: On “Tokyo Trial And Beyond” by B.V.A. Roling

The Tokyo Trial Was the Main Engine of the U.S. Post-War Propaganda Machine against Japan.

Tokyo Trial and Beyond

One does not have to wait for this detailed account on the trial of Judge B.V.A. Röling to understand the very nature of the trial: it was one of two post-war kangaroo courts held by the victorious Allied Powers exercising retroactive laws on the “evil” Axis losers.

The official records of the trial show that the victors were completely immunised from condemnation for their own war crimes on Japanese soldiers and over a million of civilians while most of the decent counter-evidences of the defendants were summarily dismissed.

I must leave the argument that whether it was right thing to breach the universal consent on prohibition against the retroactivity for the sake of condemnation of Nazi Germany for the Holocaust with which the Allied Powers thought otherwise they could not have even tried the “evil Nazis”, however, I must stress here that,

even if retroactivity is justified in the case of Nuremberg Trial, it should not be applied to Tokyo Trial because in the first place Japan’s crimes against peace and against humanity were never substantiated in the court.

The Tokyo Trial judged 25 Japanese with a bunch of unsubstantiated hearsay evidences and gross fabrications. That all of them were found guilty had been fixed from the first place.

Judge Röling admits that the authority of the trial, i.e. the U.S. government, had never intended to allow “dissenting opinions”.

Seven of the defendants, including Tojo Hideki, the Allied Powers’ so-called “the Japanese equivalent of Hitler”, were hanged. For their “PRESUMED” guilty charges. Is this their so-called “the judgments of the civilised countries”?

When one thinks of the true meaning of the Tokyo Trial, they must note that this is only part of the propaganda machine of the ex- (or, still be?) Allied Powers that has been condemning Japan for her “horrible war crimes” and that has successfully worked as various excuses whenever they want to sponge a big deal of money off Japan.

The main body of the propaganda machine is the U.S. operated programme on occupied Japan from 1945 to 1952: The War Guilt Information Program.

●They controlled the Japanese mass opinion with their scrupulously perfect and covert censorship over the whole government body, mass media and education throughout the occupation.

●They gave children text books written by the U.S. occupation authority in Japan lead by the Supreme Commander of the Allied Powers, General Douglas MacArthur.

●They broadcast radio and later TV programmes like “The Truth is This!” which was based on the Tokyo Trial and other local war crimes trials in the Far East to condemn Japanese Army’s “barbaric acts” in the battlefields to the docile and gullible Japanese ordinary people hiding themselves behind NHK, Japanese state-running broadcast agency

●They purged every tiny element of the “militarist, Imperialist and ultra-nationalist” which applied to ex-soldiers, who returned from the battle fields in South East Asia and China, and the Japanese nationals who were not assumed as “leftists” which means, well, most of the Japanese who were ready to die fighting for their country. 200,000 Japanese were purged and a million went into severe destitute because of that.

●On the other hand, they released the left-wingers who had been imprisoned during the war. Consequently, Japanese communists and socialists who have been connected with former Soviet Union / the Comintern and / or Chinese Communist Party have grown influential in post war era with the support of the New Dealers within the Occupation Army authority.They supported to form the Japanese leftist Teachers Union. The JTU have been subversive ever in these decades imbuing innocent children’s mind with their Chinese / Korean oriented propaganda; “Nanking Massacre”, “Comfort Women”, “Unit 731” and on and on and on……

To me, they are so shamelessly desperate to co-operate even with their arch-enemy, the “evil” king of capitalism / imperialism / hegemonism, the U.S.A., in order to survive the post-Cultural-Revolution-and-fall-of-the-Iron-Curtain era.
But the U.S.A. may have been sharing the desperation for its own sake of dominance in the world.

Meaning of re-thinking of the Tokyo Trial is, therefore, too significant for the U.S.A. to ignore. It will challenge their very authority in the role of “the Police of the world”.

So is it for China and Russia and maybe other victorious countries in the World War 2. Without continuing to blame Japan for the old false allegations, they may lose their hegemony and authority over their respective nationals and that may even sully the authority of them in the executive committee of the world powers.

That is, in my humble opinion, the very reason why very few people, if it is not no one, from the countries of the victors of the WW2 show interest in rethinking of the trial.

Even this late Judge Röling, who I suppose is a very decent jurist and a fair thinker of the future of the International Law, did not dare make a searching inquiry into the dark-side of the Tokyo Trial. Then who dares now?

I am hoping that people like the accusers of opaqueness of the 1990’s U.S. oriented attack on Iraq will pay a little attention to the injustice done to Japan by the U.S. and other Allied countries since that is still haunting and damaging Japan’s national interest and spirit.

Re-thinking about Tokyo Trial should, I believe, do good to the future of the humanity in the light of the International Law as well.

Perhaps putting Calumny in the International Law would be good start.


Falsification of History: GHQ Censorship and the “Brain Washing” War Guilt Information Program during the Occupation, 1945 – 1952

August this year, 2015, marks the 70th anniversary of the end of the World War 2.

What the most truly unbelievable to me is the fact Japan as a whole has never, ever officially discussed for 70 long years: Why Japan went to the war.

Not to speak of ordinary people, but even scholars, historians and journalists seem to have been suffering from aphasia or thinking process malfunction in their brain when they speak of a simple question;

“Why Japan went to war against the USA and the Great Britain even though everyone knew Japan could never win” – the answer is always: “Japan went to war because those jingoistic militarists were stupid and went berserk”.

It is well after I became an adult where I noticed there are, indeed, some Japanese people view this matter in different angle and say:

The war Japan fought was not an aggressive war.

I also noticed that, without exception, the former – people who say Japan waged aggressive war – treat the latter with contempt and call them “right-wing revisionist”.

It is quite clear that they use the word “revisionist” in the same way as “fascist” or “Neo-Nazi”, gathering from the emotion those “anti-right wingers” show when they utter it.

They never seem to hide their contempt at those people, always using disdainful tone of voice as if those “right-wing” people were intelligently inferior to them, and never want to listen to those who try to refute.

Their way of thinking; “Japan was evil and the sole aggressor in the Pacific War” is called by people who think otherwise: “Tokyo Trial view of history”.

Majority of Japanese people, ordinary people and scholars alike, believe in the view as the “well established fact”, because they have been taught in that way in school and have learned from media.

A typical follower of the Tokyo Trial view of history in academic/politic world is Kitaoka Shin-ichi, the director of the International University and the deputy-chairperson of the advisory panel appointed by Prime Minister Abe Shinzo to help him draft the 70th anniversary statement which is going to be issued in August amidst growing anticipation of China, South Korea and the USA.

Kitaoka publicly spoke of the upcoming 70th anniversary statement at a symposium in Tokyo, as his personal opinion, that he wanted Mr. Abe to say that “Japan DID wage aggressive war” in the statement because:

“It is an established fact that Japan as a whole waged AGGRESSIVE war and invaded China and killed lots of lots of Chinese people which we Japanese should eternally be sorry.”

Indeed, since the end of the war 70 years ago, history textbooks have implied – not to be said aloud – “Then, the justice of the USA beat Japan and gave us Democracy, thank goodness!”

History textbooks in Japan is notoriously boring with just long chronological list of events and very little explanation “Why it happened” and “How it relates to other events”, but they certainly have succeeded to give naïve primary school children including me some impression like:

“Because of the triumph of the USA – not the whole Allied countries – the world have regained Peace again … forever”

That is why I was so shocked when I learned from TV about the truce that ended Vietnam War in 1973.

The USA was fighting a war? But, fighting a war is only for a BAD country like Japan…

I was a naïve, although book-loving, 5th grader then, but what about intellectuals and politicians? They have completely abdicated all responsibility to have exhaustive discussions and to provide insight on the matter:

What did the World War 2 mean to Japan?

Was Japan really a fascist state?

Did Japan really invade China/Asia and massacre people there?

Did Japan really want to conquer the world?

Were the Allied Powers really the errorless agents of the justice?

And, why on Earth, does the monument at the Hiroshima Atom Bomb Memorial say [to the victims of the atomic bomb]:

“Rest in Peace, We Promise We Will Never Repeat This Error.”?

Does that mean Hiroshima [and Nagasaki later] was atom-bombed because Japan made a mistake “waging the evil war against America and Britain”?

Judge Radhabinod Pal of India, who was one of 11 judges at the Tokyo Trial and made his own dissentient judgment insisting all Defendants were innocent, criticised this wording saying:

“It was not the Japanese who dropped the atom-bomb – it is the American and their hands are not yet cleaned.”

The author of the epitaph, Saika Tadayoshi, who became a professor of Hiroshima University in 1949, when the monument was erected, also a victim of the atom-bomb, counter-argued the criticism and explained who “we” are in the epitaph: “That ‘we’ are us, the citizens of the world.”

“The Tokyo trial view of history” is also called “self-tormenting view of history”. You can see why.

Anti-Atomic/Hydrogen bomb movement was organised after the US Hydrogen bomb test on Bikini Atoll involving suspected contamination of a Japanese fishing boat, Lucky Dragon #5, on 1 March 1954, but what they have been against was the Nuclear War, and apology for the Hiroshima and Nagasaki have never been demanded to the USA.

They rather condemn Japan being the aggressor in WWⅡ and the government promoting atomic power plants.

Since the World War 2 ended, the Japanese people have been taught that if it was not for the US occupation army/GHQ, Japan never had been democratic country and never enjoy the freedom of speech, thought and religion.

But, in fact, what the GHQ actually did was the opposite:

They suppressed the free speech under the tightest, clandestine censorship.

That is the main reason why Japan as an independent country has never had our own view of history – neither our own Independence Day: We are still occupied, psychologically.  

The Civil Censorship Detachment, which had been established in January 1945, began its operation in Japan on 3 September 1945, on the day following Japan’s surrender to the Allied Powers.

Eto Jun, the author of “The Censorship Operation in Occupied Japan” writes:

“The CCD enforced a very thorough and stringent censorship operation over all Japanese media of expression: newspapers, radio scripts, motion pictures, dramatic productions, phonographic records, books, magazines, and pamphlets. Not even slides and kamishibai, a paper picture-card show for children, could escape the scrutiny of the Occupation censors.”

(p.239, Chapter 10: The Censorship Operation in Occupied Japan in “Press Control Around the World by Jane Leftwich Curry and Joan Dassin)

Following is a list of categories as the guide-line for the censorship that issued as SCAPIN 33 on 19 September 1945.

(Author’s note: SCAPIN means SCAP’s Instruction)

  1. Criticism of SCAP:

This is any general criticism of SCAP and criticism of any SCAP agency not specifically listed below.

  1. Criticism of Military Tribunal:

This is any general criticism of the Military Tribunal or specific criticism of anyone or thing connected with this tribunal.

  1. Criticism of SCAP Writing the Constitution:

Any reference to the part played by SCAP in writing the new Japanese Constitution or any criticism of the part played by SCAP in the formation of the constitution.

  1. Reference to Censorship:

Indirect or direct references to censorship of press, movies, newspapers, or magazines fall into this category.

  1. Criticism of the United States:

Any criticism, direct or indirect, of the United States falls into this category.

  1. Criticism of Russia:


  1. Criticism of Great Britain:


  1. Criticism of Koreans:


  1. Criticism of China:


  1. Criticism of Other Allies:


  1. General Criticism of Allies:

Criticism of the Allies, not directed at any specific country, falls into this category.

  1. Criticism of Japanese Treatment in Manchuria:

Criticism referring specifically to treatment of Japanese in Manchuria falls into this category. These are not to be listed under criticism of Russia and China.

  1. Criticism of Allies’ Pre-War Policies:

Any criticism of any policies of the Allies, singly or together, which existed prior to the war falls into this category, it will not be listed under criticism of any specific country.

  1. Third World War Comments:

Deletions made on the subject of the Third World War will be included here, rather than under criticism of any particular country.

  1. Russia vs. Western Powers Comments:

Comments on the situation existing between the Western Powers and Russia fall into this category, and will not be listed under criticisms of Russia or any other Western Powers.

  1. Defense of War Propaganda:

Any propaganda which directly or indirectly defends Japan’s conduct of and in the war will fall into this category.

  1. Divine descent Nation Propaganda:

Propaganda which either directly or indirectly claims divine descent for either the Nation of Japan or the Emperor will fall into this category.

  1. Militaristic Propaganda:

This will embrace all propaganda strictly militaristic in nature, which is not included under Defense of War Propaganda.

  1. Nationalistic Propaganda:

This will embrace all propaganda strictly nationalistic in nature, but will not include militaristic, defense of war, or divine descent nation propaganda.

  1. Great East Asia Propaganda:

This will embrace only propaganda relating to Great East Asia, and will not include militaristic, nationalistic, defense of war, divine descent nation, or other propaganda.

  1. Other Propaganda:

This will include all other types of propaganda not specifically included above.

  1. Justification or Defense of War Criminals:

Any justification or defense of war criminals will fall under this category. It will not include criticism of the Military Tribunal, however.

  1. Fraternization:

This will include stories dealing strictly fraternization. These stories will not to be included under criticism of the United States.

  1. Black Market Activities:

Reference to black market activities will fall into this category.

  1. Criticism of Occupation Forces:

Criticism of the Occupation Forces will fall into this category, and will not therefore be included under criticism of any country.

  1. Overplaying Starvation:

Stories overplaying starvation in Japan will be under this category.

  1. Incitement to Violence and Unrest:

Stories of this nature will be included here.

  1. Untrue Statement:

Statements palpably untrue will fall into this category.

  1. Inappropriate Reference to SCAP (or local units)
  2. Premature Disclosure


With this thorough, rather repetitious set of lists, the GHQ censorship was operated as the backbone of the US occupation plan; WAR GUILT INFORMATION PROGRAM, and the objectives of the programme were:

“To show that there is adequate moral basis for punishing those found guilty of planning, preparing, initiating, waging or conspiring to wage a war of aggression [sic].

To show that it is in behalf of all mankind that action is being taken against those suspected of war crimes.

To show that punishment of war criminals is necessary for the construction of a peaceful and prosperous Japan and for future world security.

To show that war criminals bear the major responsibility for the present plight of the Japanese people, but that the people themselves share a [sic] co-responsibility for tolerating or actively supporting the militarist regime.”

(Confidential GHQ/SCAP Memorandum to Section Chief, 21 December 1945;

P70, SEIRON, MAY 2015; “US Occupation Army’s Brain-Washing Operation for Japan: War Guilt Information Program Documants Finally Found” written by Sekino Michio)

Now it is clear: They cunningly put Japan in a traumatizing and continuing situation now perceived by everyone as true;


“It was responsibility of the whole Japan, ordinary Japanese people as well as the wartime leaders.”

“It is the justice of the people of the whole world that Japan is being punished.”

In order to accentuate this “Japan vs. the World” situation, Tokyo Trial suddenly added judges from India and the Philippines.

Tokyo Trial successfully showed the world that: Japan was tried and punished by its Asian neighbours – whom in fact Japan helped fight independence war against their colonists in “the Great Asia War” as Japan called it.

But Japan was hushed. Only stories that GHQ approved were published.

Along with 7,000 books that were completely suppressed during the occupation, every day over 5,000 articles/materials were checked by 370 CCD staffs and 5,700 Japanese out-sourcing staffs – to make it look like Japanese themselves are doing.

As the result, things that are inconvenient for the Allied countries/white colonialists were suppressed:

*Invasion and exploitation on non-white people of the whole world since 15th century

*Slave-trading including Japanese victims

*Japan proposing Racial Equality clause in the Covenant of the League of Nations in 1919 that was dismissed by America, Britain, Australia and Canada  

*Japan’s involvement to independence wars of colonised countries in Asia; namely Burma, Manchuria, Republic of China, the Philippines and India …

Japanese Imperial Army assisted those countries with supplying arms, training the soldiers and fighting side by side, dying together as brothers-in-arms.

But after the war, instead of being recognized as the leading country of the Asia, Japan has continuously been labeled as “unremorseful ex-convicts”.

Even though MacArthur finally came to senses when he put himself in Japan’s situation with communist threat in Asia in Korean War, testifying that Japan’s “going to war was largely dictated by security.”, (Hearings before the Committee on Armed Services and the Committee on Foreign Relations/United States Senate/Eighty-second Congress First session to conduct an inquiry into the military situation in the Far East and the facts surrounding the relief of general of the Army Douglas MacArthur from his assignments in that area/Part 1/May 3,4,5,7,8,9,10,11,12, and 14, 1951/Printed for the use of the Committee on Armed Services and the Committee on Foreign Relations/United States Government Printing Office/Washington: 1951) it was too late.

This Allied Powers’ post-WW2 propaganda machine had become a monster.

The censorship be its backbone, the Constitution and the Fundamental Law of Education made by GHQ be the brain and the communist-oriented social system after the Purge during the occupation be the blood, the monster has never stopped keeping Japan “a sycophant with money” for the Allied Powers now the Permanent Members of UN Security Council.

Essentially, the War Guilt Information Program has been “the Reform of ‘evil’ Japan and the Japanese through thoughts and languages and its objectives are to change Japan into just a ‘non-Japanese’ region, and to change Japanese people into somebody that are not Japanese anymore”, as Eto Jun pointed out.

(“Tozasareta Gengo Kuukan – Space of Language That Was Closed” by Eto Jun, author’s translation from Japanese to English)

When I heard George W. Bush saying on TV in 2003 that the US occupation of Iraq might have taken on “GHQ method”, I was horrified and felt sorry for the Iraqis: No people should be demonized and psychologically abused like Japanese have been done by GHQ.

Fortunately to the Iraqis, it did not happen as the world has changed dramatically from the post-WWⅡera into internet age where getting information became easier 1000 times and exercising such clandestine operation would be difficult.

Still, my heart sinks whenever I think of this situation Japan and the Japanese, people in the past, present and future, are in.

Will we ever have the Independence Day?

Or will we have a day in that we Japanese can discuss and study our own history without being insulted or humiliated by groundless allegations?

I hope, someday, Japanese people can raise our rising-sun flag with pride and admiration, being a member of the family – the world.

Calumny and Miscarriage of Justice: The Tokyo Trial Never Proved “Nanking Massacre” Really Happened Yet Hung General Matsui for Negligence with Divided Verdicts

Regent St 1

Those “Mountain of Evidence” Have Never Substantiated

Even Pulitzer Prize winner, John W. Dower (2000, Embracing the Defeat: Japan in the Wake of World War 2) speaks of “Nanking Massacre” in his book as if it was a cold fact and seems to have never doubted if the massacre really happened.

People think “Nanking Massacre” has completely been proved by “a mountain of hard evidence” such as:

●Testimonies of victims and eyewitnesses
●Video footage and photographs
●Confessions of the “perpetrators”; soldiers of the Imperial Japanese Army
●The Tokyo trial with testimonies of victims and eyewitnesses

For 70 years since the Second World War ended, Japan has been falsely accused by people who believe that these so-called “hard evidence” are all truly valid.

A few people, who have realised that those have never been substantiated at all, speak up for Japan and often meet furious criticisms.
They are always branded as “unremorseful, right-wing revisionist”.

Those critiques believe they are on the side of justice (and very often think they are intelligently superior, too) determined not to listen to those “stupid right-wingers”.

But, they must know, since nobody has ever proved “Nanking Massacre” really happened, they need to prove it showing solid, verified evidence before accusing Japanese grandfathers of unlawful killings outside of the battle, rape, arson and theft as war crimes.

The Soldiers of the Japanese Imperial Army Were Folsely Accused

The burden of proof rests on the party who advances a proposition affirmatively (“actori incumbit onus probandi”).

If one accuses people of doing wrong, they have to prove that the suspected indeed have done the said wrongdoing with objective, substantiated evidence.

If they cannot do that, it means that makes the suspected either presumed innocent or falsely accused.
If the accuser knowingly smears someone, it will be calumny.

Calumny: The making of false and defamatory statements about someone in order to damage their reputation

Those are basic principle of laws. It is common sense.

Tokyo Trial Shamelessly Ignored Defense Counsel’s Challenge

In the Tokyo trial, however, that was completely ignored.
The prosecutors and judges treated the “Nanking Massacre” as if it was already a fact that was completely verified and when it was challenged by the Defense Counsel, they simply swept it aside.

The 29th of August, 1946 was one of the days the prosecutors of the Tokyo trial gave evidence on the “Nanking Incident”.
The Defense Counsel Levin says to the president of the court:

MR. LEVIN: Mr. Brooks calls [sic] my attention to the fact that in another portion of the affidavit is contained the statement that 300,000 were killed in Nanking, and as I understand it the total population of Nanking is only 200,000.
THE PRESIDENT: Well, you may have evidence of that, but you cannot get it in at this stage.

(p.4,551, ”International Military Tribunal for the Far East; R. John Pritchard. The Tokyo major war crimes trial: the transcripts of the court proceedings of the International Military Tribunal for the Far East”)

The schedule of the procedure in the Tokyo trial was designed to have been a huge disadvantage to the Defendants.
All Prosecutors’ case was presented consecutively taking 192 days, (finished on 24 January 1947), before the defendants’ case started to be presented.

Here, there is a fact that most of the people of the world do not know:
GHQ, the US occupation army authority, put whole Japan under their censorship during the 7 year occupation.

When the Tokyo trial started on 3 May 1946, all Japanese media was already under the tightest censorship and could say nothing against the will of GHQ.
As the Prosecutor of the Tokyo Trial “revealed” those “war crimes” of the Imperial Japanese Army that were “hidden from the Japanese national by the evil leaders of wartime Japan”, the puppet newspapers and NHK, the Nippon Hoso Kyokai (Japanese broadcasting Association) report them as if they were “shocking facts”.

Naturally, Japanese people were appalled by hearing of those war crimes the IJA alleged to have committed in the war.
By the time the Defense Cases on “Nanking Massacre” started to be heard on 5 May 1947, people’s head had already been saturated by those “atrocities that the IJA committed” that all Japanese own media, their authority, reported.

The Prosecutors’ “evidence” for the “Nanking Incident” was started to be presented on 25 July 1946.
Along with some Chinese witnesses, foreign members of the International Committee of the Nanking Safety Zone, Robert O. Wilson, Miner S. Bates, Lewis S.C. Smythe and Reverend John Magee gave “evidence” as the prosecutor’s witnesses.

It seems that the president of the tribunal, Sir William Webb, kept insisting that those were the “evidences”, not the “affidavit”. (P.2529, Ibid)

Affidavit: A good way to think of an affidavit is as a sort of written court testimony. Where, in a court of law, you’d have to place your hand on a Bible and swear that you’re telling the truth and nothing but the truth, on an affidavit, you simply do this in writing. You’re under oath, but you’re on paper.


It looks like that the President Judge Webb did not want people’s attention to the fact that those pieces of “evidence” were not made under oath.

Also, the defendants’ counsels kept entering objection to their testimony as they were all hearsay, but “the objection to hearsay [had] been overruled repeatedly” by the president of the court. (p. 2,535, Ibid)

Foreigners of Nanking Saw No Illegal Killings by Themselves

On Thursday 15 August 1946, just after he was introduced to the court, Reverend John G Magee was asked by the prosecutor Mr. Sutton:
“What was the action of the Japanese soldiers toward the civilian Chinese men after they had possession of the city of Nanking on December 13, 1937?”

Rev. Magee answered:

“It was unbelievably terrible. The killing began immediately in several ways, often by individual Japanese soldiers or, up to thirty soldiers together going about, […] and then, soon, there was organized killing of great bodies of men. Soon there were bodies of men lying everywhere, and I passed columns of men being taken out to be killed. Those people were being killed by rifle fire and machine gun principally.

(p. 3,894, Ibid)

The manner of Rev. Magee delivering his testimony was that as if he had seen those “atrocities” of the IJA with his own eyes, but it was not the case.

On the second day of his testimony, after citing 400 strong cases of the IJA’s “atrocities” from the Documents of the Nanking Safety Zone, Rev. Magee was asked by Captain Brooks, the Defense Counsel:

“Now, how many of these acts of murder did you personally witness, Mr. Magee … approximately?”

And he answered:

“I thought I made that clear in my testimony.
I only personally witnessed the killing of one man.”

Capt. Brooks asked the same question about rape and Rev. Magee answered:

I told in my testimony of one man I saw actually in the act of rape.”
“[…] the other two men were on the bed with the girl and ran off, and their father said they raped her before we got there.”

(p.3,929, Ibid)

Rev. Magee said that he saw only one killing and one rape act. (The two other “rape” cases were hearsay.)

Rev. Magee actually wrote about this killing he personally “witnessed” in his diary on 19 December 1937:

“Just day before yesterday we saw poor wretch killed very near the house where we are living. So many of Chinese are timid and when challenged foolishly start to run. This is what happened to that man. The actual killing we did not see as it took place just around the corner of a bamboo fence from where we could see.”

(p.171, Eyewitnesses to Massacre; American Missionaries Bear Witness to Japanese Atrocities in Nanjing, edited by Zhang Kaiyuan)

The Chinese Soldiers Breached International Law

The Japanese Army first entered the city of Nanking and captured it on 13 December 1937.
Then, tens of thousands of Chinese soldiers ran into the Safety Zone disguising themselves as civilians, involving flagrant breach of the international law, namely 1907 Hague Convention, the Imperial Japanese Army had to run a mopping-up operation to capture those deserters/plain-clothe guerrillas.

The operation lasted several days until the day of the ceremonial entrance of the Imperial Japanese Army lead by General Matsui Iwane, the Commander-in-Chief of the Japanese Central China Area Army, and Prince Asaka, the Commander-in-Chief of the Shanghai Expeditionary Army.

This killing of a man witnessed by Rev. Magee happened on the day of the entrance ceremony.
Obviously, as Rev. Magee writes, however sad situation it was for that poor man, it was not illegal killing.

Then, what about other members of the International Committee of the Nanking Safety Zone? Did they personally witness those “murders”?

According to the Documents of the Nanking Safety Zone, they themselves witnessed only one killing; case number 185:

“On the morning of January 9, Mr. Kroeger and Mr. Hatz saw a Japanese officer and soldier executing a poor man in civilian clothes in a pond inside the Safety Zone on Shansi Road, just east of the Sino-British Boxer Indemnity Building.
The man was standing in the pond up to his waist in water on which the ice was broken and was wobbling around when Mr. Kroeger and Hatz arrived.
The officer gave an order and the soldier lay down behind a sandbag and fired a rifle at the man and hit him in one shoulder. He fired again and missed the man. The third shot killed him. (Kroeger, Hatz)

Note: We have no right to protest about legitimate executions by the Japanese army, but this certainly was carried out in an inefficient and brutal way. Furthermore, it brings up a matter we have mentioned many times in private conversation with the Japanese Embassy men: this killing of people in ponds within the Zone has spoiled and thereby seriously curtailed the reserve water supply for the people in the Zone. This is very serious in this long dry spell and with the city water coming so slowly.”

(p.78, “Documents on the Rape of Nanking” edited by Timothy Brook)

Again, only killing they saw themselves was a legitimate execution of a plain-clothe guerrilla for which they admitted that they could not protest about it to the IJA.
They actually worried about water supply rather than killings themselves.

And they knew two things:

1. The IJA was doing mopping-up operation and the Chinese “people” in civilian clothes the IJA was after were all ex-soldiers.
2. It was the Japanese Army who was restoring the infrastructures of the city of Nanking.

As we have seen, in the Tokyo trial:

*All Prosecutor exhibits that were never made under oath were treated as good “evidence”
*All hearsay evidence were accepted
*Most of the exhibits the Defense Counsels tried to present to the court were summarily dismissed
*No perjury was taken from the Prosecutor side

Perjury, also known as forswearing, is the intentional act of swearing a false oath or of falsifying an affirmation to tell the truth, whether spoken or in writing, concerning matters material to an official proceeding. Contrary to popular misconception, no crime has occurred when a false statement is (intentionally or unintentionally) made while under oath or subject to penalty—instead, criminal culpability only attaches at the instant the declarant falsely asserts the truth of statements (made or to be made) which are material to the outcome of the proceeding. […]
Perjury is considered a serious offence as it can be used to usurp the power of the courts, resulting in miscarriages of justice


Tokyo Trial Found Gen. Matsui Innocent on Ordering and Authorising of “Nanking Massacre”

General Matsui Iwane was hung on the count 55 – Disregard of duty to secure observance of and prevent breaches of Laws of War, while he was acquitted on the count 54 – Ordering, authorising or permitting atrocities.

It means that the Tokyo Trial never found evidence that shows a plan or an order for killing of innocent Chinese civilians of Nanking.

But, as we already saw, that the so-called “Nanking Massacre” really happened or not was not even questioned by either the prosecutors or the judges of the Tokyo trial.

The Tokyo trial’s objective was to show the Japanese national and people of the world that “Japan was evil but the Justice of the noble Allied powers prevailed.”
It was never to pursue the truth of history.

The Article 11 of the Peace Treaty with Japan, a.k.a. San Francisco Peace Treaty, signed by 48 countries in September 1951, demanded Japan to keep their so-called “war criminals” of Japan in prison until the Allied powers allow Japan to release them.

Article 11

Japan accepts the judgments of the International Military Tribunal for the Far East and of other Allied War Crimes Courts both within and outside Japan, and will carry out the sentences imposed thereby upon Japanese nationals imprisoned in Japan. The power to grant clemency, to reduce sentences and to parole with respect to such prisoners may not be exercised except on the decision of the Government or Governments which imposed the sentence in each instance, and on recommendation of Japan. In the case of persons sentenced by the International Military Tribunal for the Far East, such power may not be exercised except on the decision of a majority of the Governments represented on the Tribunal, and on the recommendation of Japan.

There Never Were “A-Class War Criminals”

In accordance with this demand, in 1952, with 40 millions of Japanese nationals’ signed petition (that was a half of the whole population of Japan at that time!) , the Diet of Japan decided that those “war criminals” executed at the end of the Tokyo trial as “killed in the war”, and the others that were still kept in prison were released after Japan obtained consent of the 11 countries that sent judges to the Tokyo Trial and other tribunals.

Sadly, this very salient fact was not kept being handed down.
As the result, now, many of the Japanese still think Japan was the “aggressor” and are ashamed of that their fathers and grandfathers were “savage murderers and rapists” in the war.
We Japanese all have felt like ex-convict for 70 years now.
When on Earth are we going to be “exonerated”?