To access the complete case file, click here
Case No.
WO235/846
Accused
Sgt Matsuda Kenichi
Court
Military Court for the Trial of War Criminals [illegible]
Charge
Committing a War Crime
“in that he, at WAICHOW, between the 25th May 1945 and the 5th August 1945, being in the service of the occupying power in the Japanese Gendarmerie, in violation of the laws and usages of war, was concerned in the maltreatment of a Chinese civilian named LI KAM-MOON, who was at that time under arrest resulting in the death of the said Chinese civilian.”
“in that he, at WAICHOW, between the 25th May 1945 and the 5th August 1945, being in the service of the occupying power in the Japanese Gendarmerie, in violation of the laws and usages of war, was concerned in the maltreatment of a Chinese civilian named LI KAM-MOON, who was at that time under arrest resulting in the death of the said Chinese civilian.”
Background
At the material time, the Accused was a member of the Special Intelligence Department of the South China Japanese Gendarmerie.
This case concerns allegations against the Accused for acts done in Waichow, China, at the relevant time under Japanese occupation, to one Li Kam Moon.
Li Kam Moon was a 20 year old baker and confectioner from Kowloon, who worked at the Café Wiseman in Des Voeux Road, Central, Hong Kong. He had a good friend, Wong Kai, who worked as a British underground agent with the B.A.A.G (British Army Aid Group). Li Kam Moon knew of his friend’s activities.
This case concerns allegations against the Accused for acts done in Waichow, China, at the relevant time under Japanese occupation, to one Li Kam Moon.
Li Kam Moon was a 20 year old baker and confectioner from Kowloon, who worked at the Café Wiseman in Des Voeux Road, Central, Hong Kong. He had a good friend, Wong Kai, who worked as a British underground agent with the B.A.A.G (British Army Aid Group). Li Kam Moon knew of his friend’s activities.
Allegations
The Prosecution began its Opening Statement with a quote: “Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends”. It went on: “The sombre pages of history are illumined with tales of heroes who died rather than betray their friends. The annals of each nation record proudly the lives of their heroic men and women who preferred death to the betrayal of their comrades in arms….. When the history of this Colony’s part in the struggle against Japanese aggression comes to be written the name of LI KAM MOON will be inscribed upon its pages.”
According to the Prosecution, the quote aptly and fittingly described what had happened to Li Kam Moon He had “refused to divulge the whereabouts of his life-time long, boyhood days friend (at this time a member of the B.A.A.G) and, whose whereabouts were being diligently sought after by the Japanese gendarmerie, especially in the person of Sgt. Matsuda Kenichi, who stands before you today indicted with the cruel maltreatment of LI KAM MOON, whereby the said LI KAM MOON met his death in the WAI ON Hospital.”
On 5 April 1944, Li Kam Moon, a civilian inhabitant of Kowloon, was arrested in Kowloon. The victim was sent to the Gendarmerie where he was interrogated by the Accused for information regarding a Chinese guerilla organisation. After being detained for 12 days, he was released and reunited with his family.
Li Kam Moon and his family then migrated to Waichow, which was then under Chinese control. Shortly after, it fell under Japanese control.
On 14 May 1944, Li Kam Moon was again arrested, this time in Waichow. His sister went to the Gendarmerie to enquire about his custody. She was not given any information but she heard her brother scream and groan in the room from which the Accused eventually emerged. They were not allowed to meet.
A week later, the Accused went to Li Kam Moon’s family and asked them to bring certain toilet requirements to the Gendarmerie hospital where he was hospitalized (Wai On Hospital in Waichow). Li Kam Moon’s sister found the victim in a wounded and bruised condition lying on a dirty bed without medical attention. She nursed her brother for 10 days, during which time she heard the Accused interrogate him, and also sounds of beating from the room where he was lying. After some time, the Accused forbade the sister from visiting Li Kam Moon.
Li Kam Moon subsequently died. His battered and bruised body was handed over to his family.
According to the Prosecution, the quote aptly and fittingly described what had happened to Li Kam Moon He had “refused to divulge the whereabouts of his life-time long, boyhood days friend (at this time a member of the B.A.A.G) and, whose whereabouts were being diligently sought after by the Japanese gendarmerie, especially in the person of Sgt. Matsuda Kenichi, who stands before you today indicted with the cruel maltreatment of LI KAM MOON, whereby the said LI KAM MOON met his death in the WAI ON Hospital.”
On 5 April 1944, Li Kam Moon, a civilian inhabitant of Kowloon, was arrested in Kowloon. The victim was sent to the Gendarmerie where he was interrogated by the Accused for information regarding a Chinese guerilla organisation. After being detained for 12 days, he was released and reunited with his family.
Li Kam Moon and his family then migrated to Waichow, which was then under Chinese control. Shortly after, it fell under Japanese control.
On 14 May 1944, Li Kam Moon was again arrested, this time in Waichow. His sister went to the Gendarmerie to enquire about his custody. She was not given any information but she heard her brother scream and groan in the room from which the Accused eventually emerged. They were not allowed to meet.
A week later, the Accused went to Li Kam Moon’s family and asked them to bring certain toilet requirements to the Gendarmerie hospital where he was hospitalized (Wai On Hospital in Waichow). Li Kam Moon’s sister found the victim in a wounded and bruised condition lying on a dirty bed without medical attention. She nursed her brother for 10 days, during which time she heard the Accused interrogate him, and also sounds of beating from the room where he was lying. After some time, the Accused forbade the sister from visiting Li Kam Moon.
Li Kam Moon subsequently died. His battered and bruised body was handed over to his family.
Defence
The Accused admitted the arrest, detention and interrogation of Li Kam Moon. He also insisted the victim confessed subversive activities against the Japanese.
The Accused denied ever mistreating Li Kam Moon. He alleged that Li Kam Moon twice attempted suicide by banging his head against a stone pillar and by stabbing himself with an old Chinese sword. This was the reason why he was hospitalised. Li Kam Moon died as a result of peritonitis and not from torture.
The Accused denied ever mistreating Li Kam Moon. He alleged that Li Kam Moon twice attempted suicide by banging his head against a stone pillar and by stabbing himself with an old Chinese sword. This was the reason why he was hospitalised. Li Kam Moon died as a result of peritonitis and not from torture.
Prosecutor
Capt. J.F. Reilly, Staff Captain (Legal) H.Q. Alfsea
Defence Counsel
Lieut. J.R. Haggan, RE.
Judges
President: Lt-Col J.C. Stewart (Dept of JAG India)
Members: Major M.I. Ormsby, West Yorks Regiment, Capt. B.N. Kaul, Frontier Force Regiment
Members: Major M.I. Ormsby, West Yorks Regiment, Capt. B.N. Kaul, Frontier Force Regiment
Prosecution Witnesses
Li Sau-Chun (Unknown)
Li Keechun (Unknown)
Yau Man (Police Constable)
Yip On (Police Probationary Sub-inspector)
Major K. Hussain (Major)
Defence Witnesses
Sgt Matsuda Kenichi (Accused) (Sergeant)
Trial Dates
10-May-1946
11-May-1946
13-May-1946
14-May-1946
Judgement Date
14-May-1946
Judgement Confirmation Date
03-Jul-1946
Judgement Promulgation Date
09-Jul-1946
Judgement
Guilty with exceptions – special finding – see appendix A. The Prosecution failed to prove that Li Kam-Moon died as a result of the ill-treatment which he received. He was convicted of “being concerned in” the maltreatment of Li Kam Moon and sentenced to 8 years imprisonment.
Petition
The Accused petitioned on the following grounds:
1. The verdict was against the weight of evidence;
2. The sentence was too severe in light of the evidence.
He stated that he was responsible only for the arrest and interrogation of the victim but not the conditions under which he was confined. He also insisted the victim received care and medical attention when he was admitted to hospital.
In reviewing the case, the Judge Advocate [unnamed Brigadier, DJAG, Allied Land Forces, SEA, 20 June 1946] commented as follows.
“It was not established by the prosecution that the accused was directly responsible for the death of Li Kam Moon and there were no eye-witnesses of his ill-treatment, which was deposed to by his sister who heard his screams during interrogation and the sounds of hitting when he was in hospital. She also described his condition after interrogation. The witnesses who were applied for by the defence to support the accused’s story of attempted suicide were not called, but if they had been called and had supported that story, it is clear that their testimony would not have affected the finding of the court”.
“The petition raises no fact or argument which could not have been considered by the court and I advise that it be dismissed and the proceedings confirmed.”
1. The verdict was against the weight of evidence;
2. The sentence was too severe in light of the evidence.
He stated that he was responsible only for the arrest and interrogation of the victim but not the conditions under which he was confined. He also insisted the victim received care and medical attention when he was admitted to hospital.
In reviewing the case, the Judge Advocate [unnamed Brigadier, DJAG, Allied Land Forces, SEA, 20 June 1946] commented as follows.
“It was not established by the prosecution that the accused was directly responsible for the death of Li Kam Moon and there were no eye-witnesses of his ill-treatment, which was deposed to by his sister who heard his screams during interrogation and the sounds of hitting when he was in hospital. She also described his condition after interrogation. The witnesses who were applied for by the defence to support the accused’s story of attempted suicide were not called, but if they had been called and had supported that story, it is clear that their testimony would not have affected the finding of the court”.
“The petition raises no fact or argument which could not have been considered by the court and I advise that it be dismissed and the proceedings confirmed.”
Keywords
Hong Kong; Waichow; Kempeitai; Gendarme/Gendarmes/Gendarmerie; Civilians; Unlawful arrest or detention; Place of detention; “concerned in”; Torture; Cruel Inhuman or Degrading Treatment; Unlawful killing; Neglect; Failure to provide adequate medical care; War Crimes; Violations of laws and customs of war; Suicide; Failure to provide adequate food and/or care; Guerilla activities; OR Guerilla activity; Anti-Japanese Activity; Communist Activities; Death from natural causes