Abstract: The Tokyo International Military Tribunal (IMT) (1946-1948) is a neglected topic in the literature on post-war international criminal law. Condemned by its critics as ‘Victors' Justice’ and expediently forgotten by its erstwhile supporters, it is commonly thought by those who recall it at all that it was little more (and probably less) than a footnote to the International Military Tribunal at Nuremberg. This work seeks to dispel this widely held belief by showing the way the Tokyo Tribunal was both similar to and different from its Nuremberg counterpart, the extent to which the critiques of the Tokyo IMT have purchase, and the Tribunal's contemporary relevance. The book also shows how the Tokyo Tribunal needs to be approached not as a monolithic entity, but as being made up of many different and often contradictory parts. The prosecution, defence, and judicial arms of the tribunal both differed with each other on many points of procedure, law, and fact, but also differed inter se, and the book shows how these differences had an impact on the proceedings. It is a comprehensive legal analysis of the Tokyo IMT, covering its law, theory, and practice and the lessons it may teach those formulating, prosecuting, and defending international crimes today. It also places the trial in its political and historical context. The work is based in part on extensive archival research undertaken by the authors.

Keywords: international criminal law, international crimes, Tokyo Tribunal, international military tribunal