The Weekly Wayback

The second world war seldom means anything more to the average Indian than a rather important chapter in a history text book. A war that took place too far away for it to leave any lasting marks on the Indian psyche or landmass, save for remote parts of the North East. In this context it is not surprising that Junichiro Koizumi's recent visit to the Yasukuni Shrine received little, if any, coverage in the local media.

The shrine is a tribute to over 2 million japanese who have laid down their lives for the country in various wars from 1869. Since the end of the war it has been a privately run institution and is under the watch of Shinto priests. This is in itself is nothing alarming. Most countries have a meticulously maintained memorial to its martyrs. What makes Yasukuni so controverial is a memorial to 14 Japanese martyrs from World War 2. All 14 Class A war criminals prosecuted by an Alllied war crimes tribunal.

Tokyo's Yasukuni Shrine is emblematic of the Japanese diffidence to accept many of the realities of its defeat in world war II. If the memorial itself was not unsettling enough, Prime Minister Koizumi makes annual visits to the Shrine, the latest being on 17th October. While he calls the visits personal and not to be linked to his official duties, that has not helped ruffled feathers in China, Korea and other parts of the world.

The Weekly Wayback however was able to find an interesting Indian connection to this story. To better understand this we need to go back to May 1946 when the International Military Tribunal of the Far East (IMTFE) was convened to try Japanese war crimes. The tribunal comprised of judges and prosecutors from the 11 victorious countries, including India, under the stewardship of Chief Prosecutor Joseph Keenan of the USA.

Mr. Keenan led a tribunal that since has been alleged with American bias and with ignoring possible allied war crimes. Critics also point out that Emperor Hirohito was left untouched and Japanese war crimes in China and Korea received inadequate coverage.

When the tribunal closed in November of 1948 it had sentenced 7 defendants to death by hanging and 16 more to life imprisonment. The former included war-time prime minister Hideki Tojo. The tribunal was unanimous in most judgements. Save for one judge who went to the extent of trashing the legitimacy of the tribunal itself. In a rather startling move Justice Radhabinod Pal of India labelled the tribunal as mere "victor's justice".

A lecturer of law from Calcutta University, Radhbinod Pal seems as much an enigma today as he was then. Google throws up a number of links when you search for his name but most merely indicate Justice Pal as the sole dissenting voice in the IMTFE. Some more diligence reveals his 1200-page ruling to be a path breaker in international law. One that questioned the legitimacy of unilateral tribunals in serving justice.

Justice Radhabinod Pal is probably yet another figure in Indian history who is hardly written or spoken about. Ashish Nandy's "The Savage Freud" was the only work the author could find that studied this "Odd man out' in any depth. It may make interesting reading. While there maybe opinions for and against Justice Pal's ruling he surely deserves to be remembered as a non-conformist who held his own. And in this age of trading old friendships for nuclear-powered new ones it is a good memory to have.

TWW