61340 Vorabseiten_e - Unabhängige Expertenkommission Schweiz

With the introduction of the management of refugee assets, the authorities
pursued several objectives. On the one hand, the measure provided security
collateral for the payment of claims under public law and for the refugees’
upkeep. During their stay in Switzerland, be it in camps, homes, hotels or with
private families, the monthly cost of their livelihood was deducted from their
accounts; medical expenses were also covered in this way. Further reasons given
for this legal measure of asset management were that it would prevent theft and
black marketeering. In addition, the fact that the authorities managed the
refugees’ assets gave them more control over the refugees and took away a good
deal of the their independence with regard to material matters. «We only want
to protect him [the refugee] from harm and to prevent him from managing his
assets – be they large or small – to the disadvantage of the nation or the canton
or himself» was Federal Councillor von Steiger’s explanation. 159 It was thus the
Police Division which decided whether the purchase of ordinary consumer
goods (such as medicine or shoes), which were paid for by the refugees
themselves, was justified or not.
The official management scheme involved cash, which was deposited on current
accounts, as well as valuables, for which deposit facilities were created. At the
end of September 1943, the SVB was already managing as many as 2,500
accounts containing an estimated total amount of 800,000 francs, as well as 800
deposit facilities. By December 1944, the number of accounts had increased
considerably: there were «around 7,300 accounts [and] approximately 2,100
deposit facilities» as well as 250 accounts in frozen dollars. After the end of the
war, the general director of the Bank told the Police Division at a meeting that
the SVB was managing around 7,000 accounts, of which «only 625 show a
balance of over 500 francs», and 2,700 deposit facilities which in many cases
contained only modest assets. 160
As a rule refugees were handed back their assets upon leaving Switzerland. It
must be said, however, that in the meantime most of the balances had decreased
considerably. Apart from the repayment for their keep, this can also be explained
by the high administrative fees levied by the bank. In addition, the authorities
had exonerated the bank from paying the refugees interest on their current
accounts. A particularly severe measure from the refugees’ point of view was
that the Police Division was authorised to sell pieces of confiscated jewellery if
necessary (including even family heirlooms) without obtaining the owner’s
permission. At the same time, foreign currency was immediately converted into
Swiss francs, any losses on exchange being debited to the refugees’ accounts.
Despite these unfavorable conditions for the refugees, the SVB did not profit
financially from managing their assets. At the beginning, the bank assumed
that the mandate given it by the EJPD would be profitable and that – with
159