In April 1946, an Australian military court in Rabaul, New Guinea, tried two Japanese non-commissioned officers and seven Taiwanese civilian guards, for the murder of 30 Chinese POWs in March 1943 in a Japanese work camp in Rabaul. The trial lasted a week, and all the defendants were found guilty and sentenced to death, though in the end only three were executed. The trial was unusual because two military judges from the Republic of China sat alongside Australian judges on the bench. Although the trial was conducted under Australian war crimes law, the presence of the Chinese judges gave the trial some of the character of the contemporaneous hanjian (national traitor) trials in China. This paper will explore the courtroom tension between two modes of transitional justice.