Argentina's top court finds 80 boxes of Nazi materials in its basement
Photo:
Handout / ARGENTINA'S SUPREME COURT OF JUSTICE / AFP
Dozens of boxes of Nazi material confiscated by Argentinean authorities during World War II were recently rediscovered in the Supreme Court's basement, the court said on Sunday.
The 83 boxes were sent by the Germany embassy in Tokyo to Argentina in June 1941 aboard the Japanese steamship "Nan-a-Maru," according to the history that the court was able to piece together, it said in a statement.
At the time, the large shipment drew the attention of authorities, who feared its contents could affect Argentina's neutrality in the war.
Despite claims at the time from German diplomatic representatives that the boxes held personal items, Argentine customs authorities searched five boxes at random.
They found postcards, photographs and propaganda material from the Nazi regime, as well as thousands of notebooks belonging to the Nazi party. A federal judge confiscated the materials, and referred the matter to the Supreme Court.
It was not immediately clear why the items were sent to Argentina or what, if any, action the Supreme Court took at the time.
Eighty-four years later, court staffers came across the boxes as they prepared for a Supreme Court museum.
"Upon opening one of the boxes, we identified material intended to consolidate and propagate Adolf Hitler's ideology in Argentina during the Second World War," the court said.
The court has now transferred the boxes to a room equipped with extra security measures, and invited the Holocaust Museum in Buenos Aires to participate in their preservation and inventory.
Experts will also examine them for any clues about still-unknown aspects of the Holocaust, such as international financing networks used by the Nazis.
Argentina remained neutral in World War II until 1944, when it broke relations with Axis powers. The South American country declared war on Germany and Japan the following year.
From 1933 to 1954, according to the Holocaust Museum, 40,000 Jews entered Argentina as they fled Nazi persecution in Europe. Argentina is home to the largest population of Jews in Latin America.
-
Reuters
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Spinoff
2 days ago
- The Spinoff
Why the government is changing the Marine and Coastal Area Act
Twenty-one years after the foreshore and seabed hīkoi, legislative changes are being pushed through that will make it harder for many Māori to prove customary title of the takutai moana. Earlier this week the government announced it is going ahead with planned changes to the Marine and Coastal Area (Takutai Moana) Act. The Act is the successor to the infamous Foreshore and Seabed Act, which was passed in 2004 amidst widespread protest from Māori. The current law is based on a compromise struck in 2011 as part of a Confidence and Supply Agreement between the National Party and Te Pāti Māori, which balances Māori rights to the takutai moana (foreshore and seabed) with the rights of the general public to access and use the beach and ocean. This new amendment would undermine that compromise. How does the current law work? The Marine and Coastal Area Act aims to strike a balance between the customary rights of Māori and the rights of all New Zealanders to access and use the foreshore and seabed. To do so, it first preserves a number of general rights for everyone, including rights of access, rights of navigation, and individual fishing rights. At the same time, it provides a way for Māori to have other rights upheld, if they can prove they have held and exclusively occupied the area since 1840, in accordance with tikanga, without substantial interruption. Where those factors can be proven, applicants can be awarded customary marine title. Crucially, customary marine title does not override the rights of other individuals regarding access, navigation and fishing. However, it does give successful applicants a say over larger-scale corporate and commercial activities in their area. Examples of this might be commercial fishing, big building projects, or any other activity likely to have a major adverse effect on the environment. This is not the same as limiting private access. Why does the government want to change the law? In 2023, the Court of Appeal was asked to interpret the test for the recognition of customary marine title. The terms 'exclusive occupation', 'in accordance with tikanga' and 'without substantial interruption', for example, all needed to be interpreted by the Court to make it clear exactly what they meant in practice. What if, for example, two iwi had control of an area according to their tikanga, which allowed each of those iwi to access that area, but excluded all others? Would that count as exclusive occupation under the law? The Court of Appeal decision in 2023 clarified the relevant tests, but the government disagreed with the result. Normally when that occurs, the losing side can appeal the decision to the Supreme Court. That's what happened in this case, but rather than wait for the Supreme Court's decision, in 2024 the government introduced the Marine and Coastal Area (Takutai Moana) (Customary Marine Title) Amendment Bill. The bill was specifically designed to overrule the Court of Appeal decision. The Waitangi Tribunal conducted an urgent inquiry on the government's plans last year. Its report said that if the bill was introduced – which it subsequently was – it would breach the treaty principles of partnership, rangatiratanga, kāwanatanga, active protection and good government. Importantly, the Tribunal also dismissed the claim from the government that the bill was just about restoring parliament's original intent, in part because that original intent included acknowledgment of te Tiriti o Waitangi. Chris Finlayson, the former attorney general who helped draft the original law in 2011, reiterated that point about parliament's original intent earlier this week. Did the Supreme Court case go ahead? Yes, and it threw a spanner in the works for the government, but for an unexpected reason – the government won. The Supreme Court disagreed with aspects of the Court of Appeal's interpretation and therefore decided to allow the government's appeal, given 'the importance of correctly stating the test'. The Supreme Court still disagreed with many of the government's arguments, but nevertheless allowed the government's appeal. The decision left uncertainty as to what would happen next. The government had originally said that it just wanted to change the Court of Appeal decision, but the Supreme Court did that for them. So what happens next? If the bill goes through, it will make it far harder for Māori to have their customary rights to the foreshore and seabed acknowledged. The Waitangi Tribunal noted that this is a drastic change, and that there had been no identified public right or interest that requires protection which might justify such a change. As noted by leading Māori lawyer Natalie Coates, the only groups which stand to benefit from such a significant restriction on Māori land rights are those seeking to undertake commercial activity. Although submissions on the bill closed on October 15 last year – with almost 6,700 submissions received – it is unlikely this is the last we'll hear of this issue, especially given its very loaded history. When the Foreshore and Seabed Act was passed in 2004, tens of thousands took to the streets in protest. It would not be a surprise if 20 years later, we're about to see the same response.
RNZ News
3 days ago
- RNZ News
Nagasaki mayor warns of nuclear war, 80 years after A-bomb
By Irene Wang and Issei Kato , for Reuters Doves fly past a Peace Statue at the Peace Park in Nagasaki after being released during a memorial ceremony on 9 August, to mark the 80th anniversary of the atomic bombing during World War II. Photo: AFP/ Jiji Press Thousands have bowed their heads in prayer in Nagasaki to mark the 80th anniversary of the city's atomic bombing, as the mayor warned that current global conflicts could push the world again into nuclear war. The western Japanese city was levelled on 9 August, 1945, when the United States dropped a 10,000 pound plutonium-239 bomb, nicknamed "Fat Man", instantly killing some 27,000 of the city's estimated 200,000 people. By the end of 1945, the death toll from acute radiation exposure had reached about 70,000. Nagasaki's destruction came three days after a US uranium-235 bomb destroyed Hiroshima . Japan surrendered on 15 August, ending World War II. After a moment of silence at 11:02 am on Saturday, marking the time of the blast, Mayor Shiro Suzuki called on leaders to return to the principles of the UN Charter and show a concrete path toward abolishing nuclear weapons, warning that delay was "no longer permissible". "This is a crisis of human survival that is closing in on each and every one of us," Suzuki told the crowd, estimated by Japanese media at 2700 people. He quoted the testimony of a survivor to illustrate the reality of a nuclear attack: "Around me were people whose eyeballs had popped out... Bodies were strewn about like stones." "Is it not this 'global citizen' perspective that will serve as the driving force behind stitching back together our fragmented world?" Suzuki asked, calling for a solution based on mutual understanding and solidarity. Nagasaki Mayor Shiro Suzuki notes the peace declaration, during the Nagasaki Atomic Bomb Memorial ceremony at the Nagasaki Peace Park, on 9 August 2025. Nagasaki marked the 80th year after the bombing and thousands of people attended the ceremony to offer prayers for the victims. Photo: AFP/ Yomiuri Shimbun - Kazuki Wakasugi The US military is believed to have chosen Nagasaki as a target due to its significance as a major industrial and port city. The city's geographical features, including its hilly terrain, were also thought to concentrate the blast. The destruction photographed after the atomic bombs were dropped on Japan in 1945, at either Nagasaki or Hiroshima. Photo: Public Domain - source University of Idaho Library Representatives from 95 countries and territories, including nuclear superpower the United States, and Israel - which neither confirms nor denies having nuclear weapons - attended the annual ceremony at the Nagasaki Peace Memorial Park for the milestone year. Russia, which possesses the world's largest nuclear stockpile, was also represented. Daiji Kawanaka, a 14-year-old tourist from Osaka, echoed the mayor's sentiments. "I truly believe a tragedy like this must never be repeated," he told Reuters, saying the anniversary prompts conversations about peace even among his young peers. "We can only pledge to take the initiative ourselves in making a step toward peace." People place paper cranes at the Peace Park in Nagasaki on 8 August, 2025 ahead of the 80th anniversary of the atomic bombing of Nagasaki. Photo: AFP/ Philip Fong Japan's leading organisation of A-bomb survivors, Nihon Hidankyo, won the Nobel Peace Prize last year for campaigning for a world without nuclear weapons. Survivors, known as "hibakusha", continue to suffer the effects from radiation and social discrimination. With their numbers falling below 100,000 for the first time this year, their stories fuel ongoing efforts to advocate for a nuclear-free world. Japan, the only country to have suffered nuclear attacks, has stated its commitment to nuclear disarmament but is not a signatory or observer of the UN treaty to ban nuclear weapons. - Reuters
Scoop
3 days ago
- Scoop
Ngāti Kahungunu Slams The Government's Decision To Push On With Marine Legislation
Ngāti Kahungunu, who have the country's second largest coastline from Paritū, north of the Māhia peninsula to Tūrakirae on the southern Wairarapa coast, have slammed the government's decision to push on with new legislation to make it harder for Māori to get customary marine title. Ngāti Kahungunu Chair, Bayden Barber, speaking from the World Expo in Osaka Japan says, 'We are a moana iwi. Our people have lived along our coast for centuries. Our ancestors had names like Tiakitai, Te Hapuku and Te Moananui because of the intimate relationship they had with the ocean. I am appalled by the Ministers' decision to push on with changes to the Takutai Moana legislation that make it harder for us to get customary title. Again, we see this government undermining the rights of Māori.' Earlier in the week, the Minister for Treaty Negotiations Paul Goldsmith, said that the government intended to pass the Marine and Coastal Area (MACA) Bill by the end of October, effectively ignoring a Supreme Court ruling saying that Māori do have customary marine and coastal rights and that these changes were not consistent with the intent of the Takutai Moana Bill passed in 2010. Barber adds, 'The legislation, as it currently stands, still sets a high bar for Māori to prove customary title, but at least we can test it through the Courts. These intended amendments to the Bill will make it near impossible for us win in court.' He continues, 'I have spoken to a few of the iwi leaders that are here in Osaka as part of the Te Aratini kaupapa. We need to send a strong collective message to this government, that this behaviour is unacceptable. It saddens me that we are still fighting the same fight 21 years on from the hīkoi for the Foreshore and Seabed.' Ngāti Kahungunu has a population of 95,741, the third largest iwi in Aotearoa and has 96 marae and over 400 hapū.
