A Rhetorical Reading of Self–Other Polarities in Counsel Arguments made before the Trials of Major Criminals at Nuremberg and Tokyo

Abstract

Abstract An argumentative narrative apart from positive rules appeared in early international criminal law (ICL). This article argues that a complex narrative pertaining to Self–Other polarities can be identified from the arguments presented by the counsel, whether prosecution or defence, in their respective case’s opening and closing arguments before the major war criminals’ trials at the Nuremberg International Military Tribunal, on the one hand, and at the International Military Tribunal for the Far East, on the other. This article proposes a fourfold taxonomy to explain said Self–Other narratives. It is further argued that these narratives could be explained through a classical rhetorical frame as aimed at enhancing the persuasion (by appealing, in particular, to logos, ethos and pathos) of the respective sides’ arguments. The article finally reflects on possible reasons why counsel appearing before these early ICL tribunals took recourse to these narratives to persuade. The constitution of the respective intended target audiences to be persuaded are considered in the process as well.