The International Military Tribunal for the Far East (IMTFE), the Japanese equivalent of the Nuremberg trials, considered many counts against Japanese military and civilian officials. Among these was Count 54: "Ordered, authorised, and permitted inhumane treatment of Prisoners of War (POWs) and others." This is part of the detailed description of this count (Chapter VIII, p.1058):

The Japanese Military Police, the Kempetai, was most active in inflicting these tortures. Other Army and Navy units, however, used the same methods as the Kempetai. Camp guards also employed similar methods. Local police forces organized by the Kempetai in the occupied territories also applied the same methods of torture.

We will show how the Chiefs of Camps were instructed in Tokyo before assuming their duties. We will also show that these Chiefs of Camps were under the administrative control and supervision of the Prisoner of War Administration Section of the Military Affairs Bureau of the War Ministry to which they rendered monthly reports. The Kempetai were administered by the War Ministry. A Kempetai training school was maintained and operated by the War Ministry in Japan. It is a reasonable inference that the conduct of the Kempetai and the camp guards reflected the policy of the War Ministry….

To indicate the prevalence of torture and the uniformity of the methods employed we give a brief summary of these methods….

The so-called "water treatment" was commonly applied. The victim was bound or otherwise secured in a prone position; and water was forced through his mouth and nostrils into his lungs and stomach until he lost consciousness. Pressure was then applied, sometimes by jumping upon his abdomen to force the water out. The usual practice was to revive the victim and successively repeat the process.

(Sound familiar?)

Among those found guilty under Charge 54 was Heitaro KIMURA, commander of Japanese troops in Burma. His verdict reads, in part:

It has been urged in KIMURA’s defence that when he arrived in Burma he issued orders to his troops to conduct themselves in a proper soldierly manner, and to refrain from ill-treating prisoners. In view of the nature and extent of the ill-treatment of prisoners, in many cases on a large scale within a few miles of his headquarters, the Tribunal finds that KIMURA was negligent in his duty to enforce the rules of war. The duty of an army commander in such circumstances is not discharged by the mere issue of routine orders, if indeed such orders were issued. His duty is to take such steps and issue such orders as will prevent thereafter the commission of war crimes and to satisfy himself that such orders are being carried out. This he did not do. Thus, he deliberately disregarded his legal duty to take adequate steps to prevent breaches of the laws of war.

The buck did not stop at the field officers. Premier Admiral Hideki TOJO was also found guilty under Charge 54. His verdict reads, in part:

The barbarous treatment of prisoners and internees was well known to TOJO. He took no adequate steps to punish offenders and to prevent the commission of similar offences in the future.… We have fully referred to the measures which were taken to prevent knowledge of the ill-treatment of prisoners reaching the outside world. TOJO bears responsibility for these measures.

Both Kimura and Tojo were hanged.