A former Auschwitz guard, Reinhold Hanning, went on trial Thursday for potentially being an accessory to mass murder, the BBC reported. Hanning, 94, escorted death camp prisoners to gas chambers, prosecutors said.
Hanning denied taking part in mass murder, but he acknowledged he was a guard. Because of Hanning’s age, the trials have to occur in two-hour increments. Three other Nazi guards will also go on trial later this year, according to the BBC.
The 2011 conviction of Nazi camp worker John Demjanjuk established a precedent of indirect accomplices being able to be tried for accessory to mass murder, the BBC reported.
A statute of limitations would prevent Hanning’s case from being heard due to the passing of 70 years since the end of World War II, but this doesn’t apply to international crimes against humanity, according to the International Committee of the Red Cross website.
Hanning has been allowed to live free for more than 70 years while other Nazi accomplices have been tried. It’s unfair to let Hanning go now that the German government has the opportunity to bring this man to justice. Letting a man who played a part in the murder of millions of people go free would send a horrible message to the rest of the world.
Most people alive today haven’t been directly affected by Hanning or the Holocaust in general, but some have older family members who were. A tragedy as widespread as the Holocaust doesn’t fade from society’s consciousness after its victims die. Pain lingers on in families for generations.
It’s strange to think a feeble old man was partly responsible for the deaths of millions. He’s 94 years old, but he was once guarding a death camp. Though Hanning likely hasn’t directly harmed anyone for quite some time, he still played a role in one of the largest genocides in modern history.
And because of Hanning’s old age, taking him to trial is more of a symbolic act than anything else. Hanning is close to death as it is, and punishing him now won’t affect his future behavior. He’s not a threat to the community in his present state, but he must be held accountable for his previous crimes, no matter how many years have passed. Germany is simply sending a message to the world that no matter how long it’s been, an atrocity is still an atrocity, and justice must be served.
It seems as if an elderly Nazi war criminal is found and brought to court every few years, which is great for the global consciousness. It keeps the conversation about horrible crimes going. Most hateful acts develop from ignorance, and keeping the Holocaust in the spotlight reminds the world of how easily the world could plummet into chaos. Global tragedies seem to get buried in the history books and are never talked about again after history tests. Trials such as these are good reminders that history isn’t just a story. It’s real, and its impact can be felt decades into the future.
On the other hand, forcing Holocaust survivors to testify against Hanning could cause them to relive some terrible memories. They must confront an indirect aggressor who represents the most excruciating pain they’ve ever known. Opening up the conversation can be helpful in the long term, but different people have different coping timelines. People react to trauma in such different ways. The victims should be the ones respected the most.
Just as Hanning has had years to reflect on his actions during the Holocaust, the families of those he helped imprison have had time for the pain and resentment to fester. Affected families don’t have to forgive Hanning for what he did, and even if Hanning does express remorse, it comes decades too late.
Hanning’s trial must go on. However painful it is to relive the past, opening up difficult conversations helps keep the peace.
