WRITTEN QUESTION E-0197/02 by Bert Doorn (PPE-DE) to the Commission. Compatibility of the lack of compensation for expropriation in Slovenia with European law.
Date: 2002-02-05
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Czechia, Poland, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, accession to the European Union, discrimination on the basis of nationality, expropriation, indemnification, nationality, ownership, privatisation

12.12.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 309 E/15

(2002/C 309 E/018)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0195/02

by Bert Doorn (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(5 February 2002)

Subject: Progress of Poland, the Czech Republic, Slovakia and Slovenia towards accession

Is the Commission aware that in several applicant countries legal acts which discriminate on ethnic
grounds are still in force, or at least have legal effect, in relation to the withdrawal of citizenship and
expropriation of EU citizens and that the persons affected are to this day denied their fundamental civil
rights and any form of legal protection?

(2002/C 309 E/019)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0196/02

by Bert Doorn (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(5 February 2002)

Subject: Restitution of property to Jewish citizens and Jewish communities in the applicant countries

Could the Commission provide a detailed summary of the legal position in the central and eastern
European applicant countries on the issue of the restitution of property stolen from Jewish citizens and
Jewish communities and does the Commission share the view that countries which have not already done
so should adopt appropriate legislation for the return of stolen property?

(2002/C 309 E/020)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0197/02

by Bert Doorn (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(5 February 2002)

Subject: Compatibility of the lack of compensation for expropriation in Slovenia with European law

What is the Commission’s view of the decision adopted on 21 November 1944 by the ‘Antifascist Council
of the National Liberation of Yugoslavia’ (AVNOJ) on the transfer of enemy property to the state, Article 1
of which transfers all property of persons of German nationality to the state, particularly given that it still
has legal effect Slovenia? Does the Commission consider this legal instrument to be compatible with the
Copenhagen criteria and fundamental rights in the European Union, and can it continue to form an
integral part of the Slovenian State’s structure following that country’s accession?

Joint answer
to Written Questions E-0194/02, E-0195/02, E-0196/02 and E-0197/02
given by Mr Verheugen on behalf of the Commission

(17 May 2002)

The Commission is constantly monitoring the compliance of candidate countries with the political
i.e. democracy, rule of law, human and civil rights, protection of
accession criteria of Copenhagen,
minorities. Since the Commission opinion on the candidates’ application for membership of the Union in
1997, each year the Commission describes and evaluates in detail the developments in these fields in its
Regular Reports on the candidate country’s progress towards accession. The reports (cid:1) the most recent
ones were adopted in November 2001 (1) (cid:1) have been transmitted to the Parliament and have been made
public. In addition, monitoring takes place in meetings provided for in the Europe Agreements (e.g.
Association Councils, Association Committees) as well as in the framework of the accession partnerships
on specific priorities.

In the Regular Report’s general evaluation, the Commission concludes that the 12 candidate countries
presently negotiating with the Union fulfil the above political accession criteria. When deciding to open
accession negotiations with candidate countries,
in Luxembourg (12 and
13 December 1997) and Helsinki (10 and 11 December 1999) endorsed the Commission’s assessment on
the political criteria expressed in the opinions and the Regular Reports. In 1999, the Helsinki European
Council stipulated explicitly that compliance with the political Copenhagen criteria is a prerequisite for the

the European Councils

C 309 E/16

Official Journal of the European Communities

EN

12.12.2002

opening of the accession negotiations. Furthermore, the European Council in Laeken (14 and 15 December
2001) specifically lists ten candidate countries, which could join the Union as early as 2004.

The situation with regard to property rights is, however, due to the war and post-war history of the
candidate countries particularly complex. It cannot be overlooked that expropriations took place long
before the creation of the Community and the entering into force of the Treaty of Rome and are therefore,
in principle, not relevant for the transposition and the implementation of the Union-acquis in the
candidate countries.

Problems related to the restitution of confiscated properties are therefore essentially the responsibility of
each candidate country, and, as the case may be, of the European Court for Human Rights. Candidate
countries have hitherto chosen approaches, which they consider most appropriate to their historical, social
and economic context. Even where no specific legislation has been enacted, each individual has the right to
take his or her case to the courts under existing legislation. After the accession to the Union, and within
the scope of application of the EC-Treaty, any discrimination on the grounds of nationality (of a Member
State) or based on racial or ethnic origin, religion or belief, will be prohibited.

Notwithstanding the lack of Union-competence for the system of property ownership (Article 295 EC), the
Commission has noted the following developments in the candidate countries on this sensitive issue: in
August 2001, the government of the Czech Republic, took the first decision (cid:1) based on a specific act that
entered into force in July 2000 (cid:1) on the transfer of property and land to the Association of Jewish Czech
Communities. In the Slovak Republic, church property has been returned on the basis of a law from 1994,
which covers the period from 1945 onwards. Furthermore, a government commission, which has been
established in August 2001, is drafting legislation with reference to the period during World War II; such
legislation would specifically deal with restitution of property of Jewish Slovak Communities. Poland has
legislation with regard to restoring ownership of communal property;
in this context a number of
synagogues as well as churches, schools, etc. have been returned or compensation has been granted. In
Romania, the Real Estate Restitution Law entered into force in February 2001, setting out the basic
principles and procedures to be applied for the restitution of property. The law also covers the 1940-1945
period and should thus satisfy restitution demands of Jews who suffered from discriminatory legislation
during the war. At the same time it needs to be mentioned that the implementation of this law has so far
been rather unsatisfactory. In Slovenia the Denationalisation Act of 1991 sets the legal basis for the
denationalisation process.

The AVNOJ decrees (2) were, again, adopted and implemented in the very specific historical setting of
World War II well before the establishment of the Community and before the Rome Treaty entered into
force. With regard to the Member State mainly concerned (cid:1) Austria (cid:1) the establishment of a Slovenian-
Austrian commission of historians dealing among other issues with the repercussions of the World War II
period, is a positive development. Furthermore, the denationalisation process in Slovenia is ongoing and by
September 2001 decisions have been made on 61 % of
these
achievements, progress in this field nevertheless should be speeded up. The issue of denationalisation has
been on the agenda of a number of meetings in the framework of the Europe Agreement (cid:1) most recently
of the Association Committee in Brussels on 15 February 2002.

the property claimed.

In spite of

(1) COM(2001) 700 final.
(2) As far as relevant for this question, these decrees state that inhabitants of German and Austrian origin should be

expelled and that their property should be confiscated.

(2002/C 309 E/021)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0254/02

by Chris Davies (ELDR) to the Commission

(7 February 2002)

Subject: UK heritage regeneration grants

The UK makes available heritage regeneration grants, financed through the state lottery, to enable the
restoration by private owners of listed buildings. The grants bridge the deficit between the market value of
a building and the cost incurred by a private owner to regenerate it.