Due to this positive background, Tracy’s character has some dilemmas regarding Janning’s role in Holocaust. However, removing those mental dilemmas, and with only a minor conflict between what he feels “is lawful" and "is ethical", he convicts all the judges including Janning. Against Janning, he had strong evidences overriding any dilemmas. That is, despite his favorable credentials, in the Feldenstein case, Janning convicted Feldenstein although he is perceived as an innocent and importantly ordered imprisonment of many innocent Jews concentration camps and thereby facilitated their deaths in. 2. It is clear that although Janning had a creditable background, he has committed or facilitated crimes against the humanity, and thus has to be punished. This is line with the ethical principle of distributive justice as this principle mainly focuses on what is good and ethical to the whole society, instead of catering to individual interests. The argument put in favor of Janning was that, should he be accountable for the deaths in the concentration camp, although he just signed an order for imprisonment. However, in line with principle of distributive justice, that action of Janning proved to be detrimental to sizable number of people or society, and that negative effect on society has to be taken into account. 3. In the context of then prevailing political and social climate, as well as historical events, the resolution in the movie seems to be apt and ethically correct. That is, at the time
of the trial, political repercussions of Second World War got subsided and Cold War has started. So, there was a view, that the German judges should not be punished strongly to avoid alienation of the German people, and to make the German government side with the United States. Quite contrary to that perception, the Germans themselves wanted to punish the Nazi criminals to wash off the taint of Holocaust and thereby salvage some pride. So, instead of taking a softer path, the resolution of sentencing the judges to life imprisonment was ethically apt. 4. Although, the Nuremberg Judgment had clear political and social impacts, it made impacts on the Healthcare arena as well. The Nuremberg Trials took place from 1945 to 1947, and it was in 1947, the World Medical Association (WMA) was established. When the WMA was set up, its founders decided to incorporate ethics for physicians taking into consideration the inhumane and unethical practices carried out by the German physicians at that time. “Conscious of the violations of medical ethics before and during World War Two, the founders of the WMA immediately took steps to ensure that physicians would at least be aware of their ethical obligations.” (Elnimeiri, 2008). Many obligations were included like, voluntary consent of the human subject is absolutely essential during treatment and medical experiments, those experiments should yield fruitful results for the good of society, importantly the experiment should be so conducted as to avoid all unnecessary physical and mental suffering and injury, experiments should be conducted only by scientifically qualified persons taking into ethical considerations, etc. (Elnimeiri, 2008).