WO235/1045

WO235/1045

“COMMITTING A WAR CRIME, in that he, at CHEUNG CHOW ISLAND in the Colony of Hong Kong between the 24th December 1944 and the 13th January 1945 when officer in charge of the CHEUNG CHOW KEMPEITAI STATION, was in violation of the laws and usages of war, concerned in maltreatment causing physical suffering to CHENG WO KWAI, LAM AH HENG, MAN FOOK, MAN YUK MUI, MAN SUI WA, CHOY SANG CHEUNG WA YUK and WONG MING also known as AH MING and FOOK TAI, all Chinese Civilian Residents of CHEUNG CHOW ISLAND.

WO235/1045

Sgt. Major Honda Isamu

Military Court for the Trial of War Criminals No. 7

“COMMITTING A WAR CRIME, in that he, at CHEUNG CHOW ISLAND in the Colony of Hong Kong between the 24th December 1944 and the 13th January 1945 when officer in charge of the CHEUNG CHOW KEMPEITAI STATION, was in violation of the laws and usages of war, concerned in maltreatment causing physical suffering to CHENG WO KWAI, LAM AH HENG, MAN FOOK, MAN YUK MUI, MAN SUI WA, CHOY SANG CHEUNG WA YUK and WONG MING also known as AH MING and FOOK TAI, all Chinese Civilian Residents of CHEUNG CHOW ISLAND.

The Accused was the head of a Gendarmerie sub-station charged with the duty of maintaining law and order in Cheung Chow Island, situated a few miles west from Hong Kong Island.

Sometime between December 1944 and January 1945, the Accused received a report about some illegal dealings in rice. The civilians involved were arrested and brought before him for interrogation.

The Prosecution relied on the Hague Rules of 1907, which Japan was a party to.

The Prosecution alleged that during the investigation of the illegal rice trading incident, the Accused unlawfully maltreated the civilian suspects. During the interrogation, he summarily punished them. The maltreatment included the following: beating by bare fist or iron-rod loaded bamboo sticks causing injuries and bleeding, stress positions (eg. a victim was made to hold up a chair loaded with heavy weights for hours); “water torture” (i.e. pouring water into the mouth and nostrils).

The Defence argued that there was “but little convincing concurrence between the testimony given by the [prosecution witnesses] about the material points of” the case. It was argued that there was discord and inconsistency thus making the evidence presented insufficient.

The Accused denied committing any of the alleged atrocities. While admitting that there might be occasionally have been some slapping, hitting with bamboo sticks and splashing of water (but not “water torture”), these were done by “a man burning with natural disinterested indignation at the theft of the common property of that community”. The Defence argued that the testimonies given by various Prosecution witnesses were not reliable at all, exaggerated, or contradictory.

Major R.C. Lai (JAG Branch)

Mr. Takano Junjiro (Japanese Barrister)

President: Lt. Col. C.F. Ball (Department of JAG in India, Barrister-at-Law)
Members: Major M.I. Ormsby (West York Regt.); Capt. R.B.R. Gorely (King’s Royal Rifle Corps)

Capt. J.N. Whitehorn (Intelligence Corps)

Cheng Wo-kwai(Fisherman. Victim)

Lai Ah-Heng(Victim)

Man Yuk-mui(Victim)

Man Sui-wa(Victim)

Choi Sang(Victim)

Kwan Man-Yee(Policeman, Water Gendarmerie attached to the Cheung Chow Gendarmerie)

Law Hok-nin(Chinese Herbalist)

Young Wai-lam(Medical Practitioner)

Capt. E.E. Williamson(Captain, War Crimes Unit)

Sgt.-Maj. Honda Isamu(Accused. Sergeant Major, Gendarmerie, Japanese Army; Cheung Chow Gendarmerie.)

Maj-Gen. Nishiyama Keikichi(Major-General, Chief of the Medical Department, Formosan Army Corps, Japanese Army)

1946-12-18

1946-12-19

1946-12-20

1946-12-21

1946-12-21

1947-09-23

1947-09-27

Held: Guilty as charged

The Accused petitioned. He argued that:
1. The verdict was against the weight of the evidence;
2. The sentence was unduly severe in the light of the evidence.

In his review of the case on 24 February 1947, the Judge Advocate [Brigadier FGT Davis, DJAG, South East Asia Land Forces] observed that “There were small discrepancies in the prosecution evidence in regard to the particular form of torture used on specific occasions, but there is no doubt that torture was used. The accused in his statement admits ill-treating persons during interrogation though he denies that it was so severe as alleged by the prosecution.”

Ultimately, he advised that “the finding of the court is supported by the evidence and I advice confirmation”.

5 years imprisonment

Hong Kong; Kempeitai; Gendarme/Gendarmes/Gendarmerie; Place of Detention; Civilians; "concerned in"; Committed; Unlawful arrest and/or detention; Interrogation; Arbitrary or Summary Punishment; Torture; Cruel Inhuman or Degrading Treatment; War Crimes; Violations of laws and customs of war; Provocation; Mitigation; Hague Regulations/Rules 1907