Victor's justice
Victors' justice may also refer to a misrepresentation of historical recording of the events and actions of the losing party throughout or preceding the conflict.
[1] The English term "victors' justice" was first used by history professor Richard Minear in his 1971 account of the International Military Tribunal for the Far East, and is typically (but not always) applied to the aftermath of warfare.
Specifically, "no war is just, unless it is entered upon after an official demand for satisfaction has been submitted or warning has been given and a formal declaration made.
Still, the exercise of that discretion must serve justice, Cicero argued: "...when the victory is won, we should spare those who have not been blood-thirsty and barbarous in their warfare" (warmaking being excused only when "we may live in peace unharmed" in no other way).
It was well known to anybody involved that during the entire war the Plataeans had fought on the Athenian side, against the Spartans, that being the duly declared policy of their city-state.
James Madison Page, a veteran of the Union Army during the American Civil War, presented a stark and detailed example of victor's justice in his 1908 book The True Story of Andersonville Prison, subtitled "A Defense of Major Henry Wirz".
Some have questioned the charges against Wirz, his personal responsibility for the conditions at Camp Sumter, and the fairness of his post-war trial.
By the mid-twentieth century, the armed forces of developed nations commonly issued their soldiers detailed written guidance on the customs and international treaty obligations that comprise the laws of war.
For example, at the trial of SS-Obersturmbannführer Otto Skorzeny, his defense was based in part on the Field Manual published by the War Department of the United States Army in 1940, as well as on the American Soldiers' Handbook.
However, an ex post facto law had to be instated for those cases, as the Finnish Criminal Act did not cover responsibility for politics resulting in a war.
