It must be admitted that failure to reply immediately to the German Armistice Commission’s letter of 10 August 1944, with the explanation that this constituted an abuse of the decree of 7 December 1941 and the directives issued in connection with it, was a grave omission. An investigation should have been initiated at once in order to find and punish those responsible for this abuse. Insofar as the Tribunal should regard Hitler’s military staff as guilty, the Defendant Keitel accepts responsibility within the scope of his general responsibility as Chief of the OKW.
THE PRESIDENT: Perhaps this will be a convenient time to take a recess.
[A recess was taken.]
DR. NELTE: Mr. President, the Prosecution have charged the Defendant Keitel with participating in the deportations for the purpose of obtaining forced labor. In this connection Keitel declares that his competency did not cover the procurement, recruiting, and conscription of people in the occupied territories nor did it cover allocation of the labor forces procured in this way for the armament industry. The Codefendant Sauckel confirmed this in his testimony of 27 May 1946.
Mr. President, I should like to have official notice taken of the following statements without my reading them. My colleague Dr. Servatius, according to our agreement, will explain the connection between the Armed Forces replacement and the procurement of manpower through the Plenipotentiary General for the Allocation of Labor.
The Codefendant Sauckel gave the following testimony:
“Question: You mean by that that the OKW and the Defendant Keitel had no functions whatsoever appertaining to the matter of procurement, recruiting, and conscription of labor in the occupied territories?
“Answer: He had no function whatsoever appertaining to this matter. I got in touch with Field Marshal Keitel, because the Führer frequently charged me to ask Field Marshal Keitel to transmit his orders by phone or by instructions to the army groups.
“Question: Did the OKW, and in particular Keitel as Chief of the OKW, have any function appertaining to the question of labor allocation in the homeland?
“Answer: No; because the commitment of workers took place in the economic branches for which they had been requested. They had nothing to do with the OKW.”