Book contents
- The International Criminal Responsibility of War’s Funders and Profiteers
- The International Criminal Responsibility of War’s Funders and Profiteers
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Illustrations
- Contributors
- Acknowledgements
- Abbreviations
- Introduction
- Part I Financiers and Profiteers after World War II
- 1 Economic Aggression
- 2 Forced Labour and Norwegian War Profiteers in the Legal Purges after World War II
- 3 Economic Protectionism
- Part II Arms Fairs and ‘Flying Money’
- Part III Developing the Available Law
- Part IV Where Should the Buck Stop?
- Part V Criminal Accountability and Beyond
- Part VI Discovering and Recovering the Profits of War
- Index
2 - Forced Labour and Norwegian War Profiteers in the Legal Purges after World War II
from Part I - Financiers and Profiteers after World War II
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 18 September 2020
- The International Criminal Responsibility of War’s Funders and Profiteers
- The International Criminal Responsibility of War’s Funders and Profiteers
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Illustrations
- Contributors
- Acknowledgements
- Abbreviations
- Introduction
- Part I Financiers and Profiteers after World War II
- 1 Economic Aggression
- 2 Forced Labour and Norwegian War Profiteers in the Legal Purges after World War II
- 3 Economic Protectionism
- Part II Arms Fairs and ‘Flying Money’
- Part III Developing the Available Law
- Part IV Where Should the Buck Stop?
- Part V Criminal Accountability and Beyond
- Part VI Discovering and Recovering the Profits of War
- Index
Summary
The Nuremberg trials largely focused on foreign forced labour brought to the Reich, and Norway was a large net receiver as well (whereas most other occupied countries were net suppliers). Therefore, the overall question guiding this chapter is why the nexus between excessive war profits and exploitation of forced labour was so weak during the Norwegian legal settlement. The answer takes account of the fact that the focus on exploitation of forced labour at Nuremberg and subsequent tribunals corresponded to norms inherent in international law (war crimes, crimes against humanity) whereas the Norwegian neglect followed from a strict framing of national law. Cases related to criminal commercial collaboration were pursued from the perspective of national treason. Because the Allies had agreed that each country should prosecute war crimes against its nationals, Norwegian jurisprudence was allowed to sustain its bias towards national treason. This meant that Norwegian businesses which had in various ways been involved in the Nazi slave labour program were never properly investigated for possible exploitation of foreign forced labour. Consequently, whereas German historiography has elaborated the nexus between forced labour and war profits, the Norwegian counterpart has not.
Keywords
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2020