本文選題：遠(yuǎn)東委員會(huì) + 日本戰(zhàn)犯��； 參考：《中國(guó)社會(huì)科學(xué)院研究生院》2013年博士論文

【摘要】：日本戰(zhàn)犯處罰問題是二戰(zhàn)后各國(guó)都非常關(guān)注的問題，因?yàn)檫@是各被侵略國(guó)家為自己討回公道，伸張正義，是人類對(duì)國(guó)際法的進(jìn)一步探索，對(duì)世界未來的和平有重大意義。遠(yuǎn)東委員會(huì)作為對(duì)日作戰(zhàn)盟國(guó)合作制定日本戰(zhàn)犯處罰政策的國(guó)際機(jī)構(gòu)，在日本戰(zhàn)犯問題上無(wú)疑有著重要的作為。面對(duì)盟軍總部在日本戰(zhàn)犯問題上造成的既成事實(shí)，遠(yuǎn)東委員會(huì)一成立就緊張地投入日本戰(zhàn)犯處罰政策的制定工作中，希望通過各國(guó)代表的共同努力，達(dá)成一項(xiàng)指導(dǎo)日本戰(zhàn)犯工作的政策決議，及時(shí)把盟軍總部的戰(zhàn)犯處罰工作納入遠(yuǎn)東委員會(huì)的體制之內(nèi)。 遠(yuǎn)東委員會(huì)第五分會(huì)是負(fù)責(zé)日本戰(zhàn)犯問題的專門機(jī)構(gòu)，其成員在制定日本戰(zhàn)犯處罰政策時(shí)經(jīng)常出現(xiàn)意見相左，彼此唇槍舌戰(zhàn)的局面，使得日本戰(zhàn)犯處罰政策的制定進(jìn)度較為緩慢。有時(shí)，為了能盡快達(dá)成一致，不耽誤日本戰(zhàn)犯處罰事宜，各國(guó)代表只得彼此妥協(xié)，一些成員國(guó)的意愿并不能得到很好的體現(xiàn)。盡管如此，遠(yuǎn)東委員會(huì)第五分會(huì)的成員還是日本戰(zhàn)犯處罰問題上付出了很大的努力，也取得了一定的成績(jī)。 本文共分為七章，，第一章簡(jiǎn)要地追溯了二戰(zhàn)前戰(zhàn)犯審判的歷史、二戰(zhàn)期間盟國(guó)首腦對(duì)戰(zhàn)犯問題的討論及設(shè)立的懲處戰(zhàn)犯的相關(guān)國(guó)際組織、日本自行審判戰(zhàn)犯的鬧劇。 第二章梳理了美國(guó)自二戰(zhàn)以來隨著世界局勢(shì)的變化一步步制定日本戰(zhàn)犯政策及為貫徹該政策所采取的行動(dòng)，如單獨(dú)占領(lǐng)日本，任命麥克阿瑟為盟軍最高統(tǒng)帥，先行逮捕日本戰(zhàn)犯，成立基南為首的國(guó)際檢察局等，使美國(guó)在日本戰(zhàn)犯處罰問題上占據(jù)主導(dǎo)地位。 第三章詳細(xì)論證了遠(yuǎn)東委員會(huì)制定日本戰(zhàn)犯處罰政策的經(jīng)過，包括遠(yuǎn)東委員會(huì)各國(guó)在日本戰(zhàn)犯處罰政策上的不同意見，以及遠(yuǎn)東委員會(huì)與美國(guó)在日本戰(zhàn)犯處罰政策上的分歧。 第四章論述了東京審判及相關(guān)盟國(guó)國(guó)內(nèi)軍事法庭對(duì)日本戰(zhàn)犯的處罰情況，以及遠(yuǎn)東委員會(huì)與這兩類審判之間的關(guān)聯(lián)。 第五章論述了遠(yuǎn)東委員會(huì)各成員國(guó)在日本戰(zhàn)犯財(cái)產(chǎn)問題上的不同立場(chǎng)，以及由此而來的各國(guó)代表對(duì)戰(zhàn)犯財(cái)產(chǎn)范圍、戰(zhàn)犯財(cái)產(chǎn)用途的爭(zhēng)論。 第六章主要圍繞盟軍總部釋放日本甲級(jí)戰(zhàn)犯嫌疑人的舉動(dòng)以及遠(yuǎn)東委員會(huì)對(duì)此的回應(yīng)、美國(guó)最高法院受理日本甲級(jí)戰(zhàn)犯上訴以及遠(yuǎn)東委員會(huì)因此對(duì)美國(guó)的交涉展開論述。 第七章闡述了遠(yuǎn)東委員會(huì)在制定結(jié)束日本戰(zhàn)犯審判政策決議過程中遇到的各種難題，各國(guó)代表由于對(duì)遠(yuǎn)東委員會(huì)職權(quán)理解的不同以及國(guó)內(nèi)審判進(jìn)展的不同，對(duì)結(jié)束乙丙級(jí)戰(zhàn)犯審判很難達(dá)成一致，最后在1949年3月31日通過了一項(xiàng)決議，只對(duì)遠(yuǎn)東委員會(huì)成員國(guó)以建議的形式要求結(jié)束乙丙級(jí)戰(zhàn)犯審判。 本文最后總結(jié)了日本戰(zhàn)犯的處罰情況、遠(yuǎn)東委員會(huì)在日本戰(zhàn)犯處罰問題上的主要作為和主要分歧，客觀地評(píng)價(jià)了遠(yuǎn)東委員會(huì)在該問題上所起的作用以及存在的局限性。
[Abstract]:The issue of punishment of Japanese war criminals is a matter of great concern to all countries after World War II, because it is a matter of great significance to the peace of the world in the future, because it is a matter of justice and justice for all the invading countries, and a further exploration of international law by mankind. The far East Commission, as an international organization to cooperate with Japan's war allies in formulating the policy of punishing Japanese war criminals, has undoubtedly played an important role in the issue of Japanese war criminals. In the face of the fait accompli created by the Allied headquarters on the issue of Japanese war criminals, as soon as the far East Commission was established, it was intensely engaged in the formulation of a policy of punishment for Japanese war criminals, hoping to make joint efforts through the representatives of various countries. A policy decision was reached to guide Japanese war criminals' work and to bring war criminals punishment at Allied headquarters into the far East Commission in time. The fifth branch of the far East Commission is the specialized agency responsible for Japanese war crimes issues. Its members often disagree with each other in formulating the policy on punishment of Japanese war criminals, and they often fight each other with each other. So that the Japanese war criminals punishment policy development progress is relatively slow. Sometimes, in order to reach an agreement as soon as possible and not delay the Japanese war criminals' punishment, delegates have to compromise with each other, and the will of some member states is not well demonstrated. Nevertheless, the members of the Fifth Branch of the far East Commission have made great efforts and made some achievements in the issue of punishment of Japanese war criminals. This paper is divided into seven chapters. The first chapter briefly traces the history of war criminals' trial before World War II, the discussion of war criminals by Allied leaders during World War II and the establishment of relevant international organizations to punish war criminals, and the farce of Japan's own trial of war criminals. The second chapter combs the United States since World War II with the changes in the world situation step by step to formulate the policy of Japanese war criminals and actions to implement the policy, such as the occupation of Japan, MacArthur appointed MacArthur as the Supreme Allied Commander-in-Chief. The arrest of Japanese war criminals and the establishment of international procuratorial bureau headed by Keinan make the United States play a leading role in the issue of Japanese war criminals' punishment. The third chapter demonstrates in detail the process of the far East Commission formulating the Japanese war criminals punishment policy, including the different opinions of the far East Commission countries on the Japanese war criminals punishment policy, and the differences between the far East Commission and the United States on the Japanese war criminals punishment policy. Chapter four discusses the punishment of Japanese war criminals by Tokyo trial and the military court of allied countries, and the relation between the far East Commission and these two kinds of trials. The fifth chapter discusses the different positions of the members of the far East Commission on the property of war criminals in Japan, and the debates on the scope of the property of war criminals and the use of the property of war criminals. The sixth chapter mainly focuses on the actions of the Allied headquarters to release the Japanese Class A war criminals suspects and the response of the far East Commission to this. The Supreme Court of the United States accepts the appeal of the Japanese Class A war criminals and the far East Commission's representations to the United States are discussed. The seventh chapter expounds the various difficulties encountered by the far East Commission in the process of formulating a resolution on ending the trial policy of Japanese war criminals. The representatives of various countries have different understandings of the far East Commission's functions and powers as well as the progress of domestic trials. It was difficult to reach an agreement on ending the trial of war criminals of Class B and C, and a resolution was finally adopted on March 31, 1949, requiring only the members of the far East Commission to end the trial of War criminals of Class B and C in the form of recommendations. In the end, this paper summarizes the punishment situation of Japanese war criminals, the main actions and major differences of the far East Commission on the issue of Japanese war criminals' punishment, and objectively evaluates the role and limitations of the far East Commission on this issue.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：中國(guó)社會(huì)科學(xué)院研究生院
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：博士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2013
【分類號(hào)】：K153

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 張皓;;戰(zhàn)犯問題與國(guó)共和談[J];安徽史學(xué);2006年06期

2 步平;關(guān)于追究日本生化戰(zhàn)戰(zhàn)爭(zhēng)責(zé)任的思考[J];常德師范學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào)(社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2003年01期

3 林曉光;中國(guó)共產(chǎn)黨對(duì)侵華日本戰(zhàn)犯的審判處理和改造[J];黨史研究與教學(xué);2004年04期

4 李東朗;李瑗;;裕仁天皇和日軍罪惡的化學(xué)戰(zhàn)[J];黨史研究與教學(xué);2007年02期

5 巢志雄;;法律推理與政治選擇——東京審判再回顧[J];法律方法;2009年02期

6 蘇曉宏;論國(guó)際司法的理論基礎(chǔ)[J];法學(xué);2004年07期

7 汪詩(shī)明;;析戰(zhàn)后初期澳美對(duì)日政策之分歧[J];國(guó)際論壇;2007年01期

8 翟新;;東京審判后日本的甲級(jí)戰(zhàn)犯政策[J];國(guó)際政治研究;2006年03期

9 劉作奎;二戰(zhàn)后中國(guó)緣何沒有駐軍日本[J];北京檔案;2004年11期

10 史桂芳;美國(guó)的對(duì)日占領(lǐng)政策與戰(zhàn)后日本軍國(guó)主義的存續(xù)[J];北京黨史;2002年03期

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前1條

1 王震宇;遠(yuǎn)東國(guó)際軍事法庭法官意見研究[D];南昌大學(xué);2009年

本文編號(hào)：1879534