 |
Please send in any articles note worthy on the subject illegal
property seizures.
Further information, please contact:
Ms. Alexandra Mareschi
Email: alexandra.mareschi(at)projusticia.net
|
|
Press release: 19.10.2006, free for publication
Sender: Alexandra Mareschi, Secretary-General
Contact: www.projusticia.net
Email
PACE Resolution 1522 (2006) Establishment of a European remembrance centre for victims of forced population movements and ethnic cleansing. Provisional edition www.assembly.coe.int
According to para. 7.1.4 the remembrance centre should not be concerned with issues of compensation for the loss of property resulting from forced population movements.
However, the resolution of property claims is one of the most complex and important challenges a post-totalitarian government can face. It is very complex, because of the infinite domestic and international rules affecting individual rights and the prevailing absence of documentary evidence to support the victims’ claims. Resolution is obviously important to the many individuals who were deprived of their property and of the material and symbolic security associated with their homes.
The process of restoring property rights and compensating losses of property is also of great significance to the international community at large. The restoration of property rights is a crucial part of reversing the destructive effects of totalitarian regimes as well as the impact of the latter on society and individuals. In fragile post-conflict societies, the protection of property rights constitutes a primary condition precedent to the long-term social and economic stability of the region.
Therefore, one would assume that the Council of Europe would play a vital role in the resolution of such conflicts.
However, it is certifiable that the latter, especially the European Court of Human Rights, is unfortunately inept to resolve such property claims, c.f. ECHR decision von Maltzan and others (No. 7191/01, 2nd March 2005).
This unsatisfactory situation is mainly attributable to four factors: i.e. due to admissibility provisions, a doubtful legal concept which the European Court’s case-law meanwhile has developed (rights in rem – instantaneous act, ill-prepared former socialist judges, who are hostile to the concept of private property and in general the lack of political will to change the status quo of communist property claims (PACE resolution 1522 (2006) and 1481 (2006) ).
To top it all off the European Union conveniently closes the door on the subject by upholding that in accordance with art 295 EC the EU will not prejudice the rules in Member States governing the system of property ownership.
Consequently, the victims are left with no legal or political remedy at all!
Through this questionable stance the Council of Europe and the European Union perpetuate totalitarian violations, create a climate of impunity and unjustly enrich post-totalitarian governments at the expense of the victims. Thus both institutions have totally failed to fulfil the goals they set out to accomplish.
The communist handwriting in this matter is not only apparent, but daunting! However, the latter cannot hush up the issue by avoiding it. Crimes against humanity remain crimes against humanity, no matter how much time has passed.
One day the whole issue will backfire. Many people are already questioning the justification for the existence of international institutions, in particular then, when they are unable (or unwilling) to apply international law.
It is high time that Justice is done.
www.projusticia.net
Back to the main page
|
|
|
