The High Commission. Even if General Xxxx did have the authority to modify the NMT sentences as Military Governor, that does not mean XxXxxx had the authority to create the good-conduct and clemency programs. Indeed, Xxxxxx X. Xxxxxx, a Major in EUCOM‘s Office of the Judge Advocate, expressly rejected that idea in a 1949 memo to the Judge Advocate himself. Xxxxxx pointed out that XxXxxx was not the Military Governor when he created the programs in December 1949 and July 1950, respectively; that position had been abolished with the creation of HICOG the previous September. The question, therefore, was whether XxXxxx‘s decision to create the good-conduct and clemency programs were justified ―by the succession of a High Commissioner to certain of the powers and authority previously exercised by General Xxxx as Military Governor and representative of the United States Government on the Allied Control Council.‖174 Xxxxxx concluded that they were not. The problem, in his view, was that the authority to modify the sentences imposed by tribunals established pursuant to Law No. 10 belonged not to the individual High Commissioners, but to the Allied High Commission – as the successor to the Allied Control Council – as a whole. The High Commission, which had been created by the U.S., Britain, and France on 8 April 1949,175 was responsible for exercising the powers that the Allies had reserved in the 172 Ministries, Order & Memorandum of the Tribunal Dismissing Count Four, XIV TWC 114. 173 Law No. 10, Preamble. 174 Memo from Xxxxxxx to Judge Advocate, European Command, 22 Aug. 1949, NA-549-2237-2, at 1-2.
