For Pal, the participation of the US in the postwar tribunals was an attempt to manufacture a narrative that would justify continuation of imperialist policies.
He exhibited a “noble spirit of courage...during the International Military Tribunal for the Far East,” the late former prime minister Shinzo Abe had said.
The war crimes tribunal provided nothing “other than the opportunity for the victors to retaliate,” said Justice Radhabinod Pal, the jurist from India.
International law and theory were behind the dissent of Justice Radhabinod Pal of India in the International Military Tribunal for the Far East after WWII.
Did Justice Radhabinod Pal condone the atrocities? Was he being soft on Japan? Certainly not. But he maintained that there were no legal grounds for the...
With a sharp sensitivity to the interrelationships between morality, vocation, and traditions, he raised questions in the trial that continue to be important in the study...
Would Japan be in a different place with China and South Korea had the Tokyo Trial addressed the responsibility of those with the authority to have...
The Tokyo Trial challenges everything about how justice is supposed to be rendered under the rule of law. These flaws contributed heavily to the numerous lingering...
