东京审判侵略战争责任追究中的制度逻辑--以荒木贞夫审判为中心

The Systematic Logic of the Aggression Responsibility on the Expansion of the September 18th Incident—Araki Sado's Case in the Tokyo Trail as an Example

根据东京审判文献资料,在追究荒木贞夫是否在扩大"九一八"事变中负有侵略战争责任时,为了弥补证据证明力的不足,被告、检方、辩方各自以明治宪法体制的不同面相作为逻辑前提进行立论,进而得出了有关侵占东北四省责任归属的不同结论。被告荒木试图将枢密院紧急会议的国家意志最高决策权作为论证集体责任的前提,认为应该由内阁和枢密院承担集体责任。检方的立论逻辑着眼于枢密院免责基础上的军部专制,据此起诉荒木贞夫的个人责任。辩方的立证脉络建立在国务大臣单独辅弼原则基础上,认为荒木的行为是遵循外务省外交方针的结果。造成这一局面的原因在于认定"反和平罪"司法实践中的需要,制度逻辑可以视为从追究国家责任过渡到个人刑事责任的桥梁。第二,源于东京审判面临证据文献缺乏的困境,制度逻辑有助于检方在起诉中形成完整的证据链条。第三,源于明治宪法体制的复杂性,它为三方从制度的不同面相出发进行立证提供了便利条件。荒木的案例表明,审判各方对明治宪政体制制度性因素的认识对于理解东京审判所具有的重要价值。

According to the archives of Tokyo trial,when investigating whether Araki Sado bears the responsibility of aggression on the expansion of the September 18 th Incident,the defendant,the prosecutor and the defense all use different perspectives of the Meiji Constitution System as the logical premise for argument and then draw different conclusions about the attribution of responsibility.The reason for this situation is that the need for the judicial practice of 'crime against peace',as the systematic logic is the transition from the accountability of state responsibility to the individual criminal responsibility. Secondly,it is due to the lack of document evidence in Tokyo trial,as the systematic logic contributes to form a complete chain of evidence in the prosecution. Thirdly,it is due to the complexity of the Meiji Constitution System itself,as it is convenient for the defendant,the prosecutor and the defense to take advantage of.This case shows that the cognition of Meiji Constitutional System is important in understanding the judicial practice of Tokyo Trial.