Prosecuting “Hate Speech” at the IMT, Nuremberg

Even though legal scholars have critiqued the trials at the International Military Tribunal, Nuremberg, one must acknowledge that on many aspects, the IMT, Nuremberg, served as a baptismal locus: one of those is the successful criminalisation of instigation as a mode of participation and the prosecution of two individuals for instigating the crimes over which the IMT, Nuremberg, had jurisdiction. As would be known in international criminal law over the decades, the conviction of Julius Streicher would eventually influence the prohibited and punishable acts in the Genocide Convention and other key legal developments on the international plane. Streicher’s conviction for the publication of anti-Semitic materials, from both a legal and political lens, would form the crux of hate speech discourse. It would also be felt in the prosecution and conviction of individuals at the Trial and Appeal Chambers of the two ad hoc international criminal tribunals (ICTY and ICTR). This chapter appraises the impact of the Julius Streicher judgment, conviction, and contribution to the recognition of similar kinds of speeches and literature in the planning, preparation or commission of serious crimes in international law, notably the Genocide Convention. The chapter also explores some of the blind spots that have become contentious in international criminal justice, for example, the academic use of the phrase “hate speech” and the requirement of causation for the conviction of the accused.