|
27 April 1999 |
|
SUVLAH Considers the Decision by the Constitutional Court on Compensation for Seized Properties - Unconstitutional! By Biljana Bašić (Politics, page 7) Zagreb, 26 April.- "By deciding in such a way about the Denationalization Act, the Constitutional Court has switched off lights of democracy in Croatia. Since we believe that by this Decision the Constitutional Court is violating the RC Constitution, we will file a lawsuit against the Constitutional Court, and appeal to the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg for protection of our rights." These are words with which Miroslav Slavić, president, and Saša Novković, spokesman for the Union of Associations for Protection of Property and Property Rights in Croatia (SUVLAH), commented for Vjesnik on Monday the last week's Constitutional Court's Decision regarding compensation for properties seized during the communist regime. SUVLAH believes that this Decision is "unjust" since it does not recognize owners' paramount request - that this property be factually (ad naturam) restored to lawful owners. Numerous claimants, including 24 House of Županije Representatives, have appealed to the Constitutional Court to establish a procedure to determine the constitutionality and legality of this Act. SUVLAH declares that the Constitutional Court's Decision violates the basic human rights. Let us bear in mind that the Court has declared that "numerous claimants petitions are not justifiable, because they originate from the assumption that former owners' rights have not been terminated." This Decision the Court establishes on a principle that "the state does not have any constitutional legislative obligation whatsoever to restore seized property to former owners." It goes on to justify the controversial Act by declaring that the State "within the boundaries of its possibilities is trying to amend injustice that former owners have been suffering." On the other hand, SUVLAH thinks that the Constitutional Court "not only failed to correct old injustices, but has conceived numerous new ones." Slavić explains that the former owners of nationalized residences are now put in an increasingly unfavorable position, because the Constitutional Court has terminated their right to be the first-in-line buyers of these residences (theirs, in the first place. Ed.). However, he is sure, that former owners will recover their rights, in the first place, a natural restitution of property when the property physically exists. "Not only that we will pursue the restitution of seized property, but we will go beyond that. That means that in future we will request before courts compensation for accumulated losses, misspent profits as well as for the traumas that we suffered in a course of our property seizures," says Slavić, who puts a considerable faith in the European Court. SUVLAH people are outraged that the Court has declared groundless some claimants' allegations that the Denationalization Act does not consider restitution or compensation for property seized during the Independent State of Croatia (NDH, 1941-1945). "Issues regarding property seized during the fascist regime are completely solved," declares the Constitutional Court. In addition, SUVLAH is not satisfied with the section of the Constitutional Court's Decision which the right to have property restored and/or to get a just compensation for seized property, now grants to foreign citizens. They think that "this will be screwed up" and that such a standpoint will initiate numerous new problems, especially those regarding the property of optants, Germans and Austrians whose property was seized during the communist regime. |
This page compliments of Paolo Benoli and Hrvoje Latkovic
Created: Thursday, July 14, 1999. Last Updated: Thursday, July
14, 1999. |
