Quartermasters can also fight the devils

On May 3, the International Military Tribunal for the Far East officially opened. Composed of legal personnel from 11 countries including China, the United States, England, and the Soviet Union, the International Military Tribunal for the Far East began to try 28 Class A war criminals of Japan.

The final battle to defeat the Japanese invaders officially began in Tokyo, Japan. The indictment of the Japanese war criminals by the Chinese delegation alone was 42 pages long.

The Chinese government delegation, which was already at a disadvantage in terms of numbers, had to face the difficult situation of "fighting away from home" in subsequent trials at the International Military Tribunal for the Far East. Because of the Japanese government's militarist propaganda, the Japanese people were very confused about the trial of Hideki Tojo and others by the International Military Tribunal for the Far East. In the eyes of the Japanese people, these people tried in the International Military Tribunal for the Far East were all heroes previously promoted by Japan, but how could they now become war criminals?

In the Tokyo Trial of the International Military Tribunal for the Far East, 25 war criminals were ultimately sentenced, but three of them were not convicted and sentenced for various reasons. They were former Japanese Foreign Minister Yosuke Matsuoka and former Japanese Navy Admiral Osamu Nagano. Both of them died of illness. The other was Japan's extreme nationalist and far-right scholar Shumei Okawa, who escaped trial by "pretending to be crazy."

Among these 25 war criminals, the Chinese government delegation requested the sentencing of seven people, namely Hideki Tojo, Iwane Matsui, Kenji Doihara, Seishirō Itagaki, Akira Muto, Heitaro Kimura and Koki Hirota.

Among them, former Japanese Army General Iwane Matsui and former Commander-in-Chief of the First Army of the Japanese Expeditionary Army in China Kenji Doihara were interrogated by the Chinese delegation. However, former Japanese Army General Seishirō Itagaki, who planned the "September 18th Incident" in Northeast China, was initially handed over to the Philippine delegation for interrogation by the International Military Tribunal for the Far East. Later, after repeated insistence by the Chinese government delegation team, the interrogation rights of former Japanese Army General Seishirō Itagaki were finally handed over by the Philippine delegation to the Chinese government delegation.

The trial of the International Military Tribunal for the Far East in Tokyo was an ordeal from the very beginning, and this ordeal reached its most difficult level when the Japanese war criminals accused by the Chinese delegation appeared in court for trial.

Matsui Iwane, who was responsible for the Nanjing Massacre by the Japanese Army, strongly denied his crimes at the International Military Tribunal for the Far East, and did not care about the tragedy of allowing the Japanese Army to massacre 300,000 Chinese soldiers and civilians. In his statement at the International Military Tribunal for the Far East, Matsui Iwane argued that it was like in a family, the elder brother could not stand his younger brother's violence and beat him, and this was because the elder brother loved his younger brother too much and wanted to encourage the younger brother to reflect on himself.

Faced with Matsui Iwane's denial, the evidence that the Chinese government delegation had been searching for in China before played a key role at this time.

The Chinese government delegation had eleven witnesses for the prosecution, eight of whom came directly from China, such as representatives of the victims of the Nanjing Massacre, survivors Shang Deyi, Wu Changde, Chen Fubao, Liang Tingfang, etc. In addition, there were three American witnesses, Dr. Wilson, Professor Bates and Pastor Magee. The three of them provided a documentary shot during the Japanese massacre in Nanjing and their testimonies when they were present at the time.

The recollections of witnesses provided by the Chinese delegation, the testimonies of foreign witnesses, and documentaries together restored the true scene of the Japanese army's burning, killing and looting in the Chinese city of Nanjing.

At the same time, the Chinese delegation also had a piece of evidence of a "one-shot kill" in their hands, which was a Japanese army order to attack Nanjing on December 10, 1937, in which Matsui Iwane's signature was prominently listed.

Faced with the overwhelming evidence provided by the Chinese delegation, Matsui Iwane was finally unable to deny it. After field investigation, evidence collection and verification, the International Military Tribunal for the Far East sentenced Matsui Iwane to death by hanging.

Itagaki Seishirō, who planned the "September 18th" Incident in Northeast China, supported the pseudo "Manchukuo" regime, and ran rampant in Northeast and North China for more than ten years, completely denied his crimes at the International Military Tribunal for the Far East.

Itagaki Seishirō presented a 48-page written testimony at the International Military Tribunal for the Far East, mainly to illustrate two points. First, the pseudo "Manchukuo" was established based on the so-called "public opinion"; second, after the July 7 Incident in China, he always advocated withdrawing troops from China and making peace with the Chinese government.

What's even more troublesome is that when the International Military Tribunal for the Far East tried Itagaki Seishirō, there were as many as fifteen lawyers and witnesses defending Itagaki.

Faced with Itagaki Seishirō's statement of not admitting guilt, Ni Zhengyu, the prosecutor advisor to the Chinese delegation, was also furious. However, as a prosecutor, Ni Zhengyu knew very well that it would be completely useless to vent his anger at the International Military Tribunal for the Far East at this time. He could only use evidence and interrogation to break down Itagaki Seishirō's psychological defenses, so as to force Itagaki Seishirō to plead guilty and be accepted by the International Military Tribunal for the Far East.

At this time, the written evidence found by the members of the Chinese government delegation in confidential archives in Japan played a decisive role.

The Imperial Conference documents, Cabinet meeting documents, secret telegrams between the Japanese Kwantung Army and the Army Ministry, and the mobilization orders of the Japanese Kwantung Army, which were sorted out by members of the Chinese government delegation from the archives of the Japanese Cabinet and the Army Ministry, all became excellent first-hand evidence to prove the crimes committed by Itagaki Seishirō.

Ni Zhengyu, the prosecutor advisor of the Huaxia delegation who had the evidence in hand, also questioned Itagaki Seishirō in a harsh voice: "The person you sent to promote the Wu-Tang cooperation was Kenji Doihara, who supported Puyi's enthronement, colluded with the Kwantung Army, coerced North China's autonomy, and instigated the independence of Inner Mongolia."

This series of questions from Ni Zhengyu, the prosecutor advisor to the Chinese delegation, were ostensibly directed at Kenji Doihara, but were actually enumerating the crimes of Seishirō Itagaki.

On October 6, 1947, the trial of the International Military Tribunal for the Far East entered the stage of personal defense of Itagaki Seishirō. Three legal experts from the Chinese government delegation, Xiang Zhejun, Ni Zhengyu and consultant Gui Yu, appeared as representatives of the Chinese government delegation on the prosecution side. They took turns to have fierce debates with the two Japanese defense lawyers Yamada Hanzo and Sakano Junkichi who defended Itagaki Seishirō, as well as three American defense lawyers, Cunningham, Mattis and Brooks.

At the trial of the International Military Tribunal for the Far East on October 6, the three legal experts from the Chinese delegation, representing the prosecution, spoke a total of 62 times, while the five people defending Itagaki Seishirō spoke a total of 93 times. The confrontation between the prosecution and the defense lasted an entire day.