61340 Vorabseiten_e - Unabhängige Expertenkommission Schweiz

prevented numerous claimants from making claims to the Federal Supreme
Court in Switzerland. In addition, anything that could have made the looted
assets legislation known world-wide was omitted. The deadline also gave precedence
to interests of absolute ownership in Switzerland and to the dictum of
«legal certainty» over the claims of the victims of National Socialism.
Obviously, this broke the promise made on the occasion of the Currie
Agreement of 8 March 1945 that the dispossessed owners would be offered
every facility to enable them to regain possession of their assets. 43 The Swiss
authorities also failed to comply with the wish expressed by the Allies on the
occasion of the negotiations in Washington in the spring of 1946 to find a
«simple and economical solution» to this problem which would take account
of the «poverty and frailty of these victims». 44
In addition to a mixture of lack of issue-awareness and of interest on the part of
the Swiss involved, the Decree on Looted Assets was also characterised by three
additional restrictions. First, there was no right to claim with respect to events
that occurred in the years prior to the outbreak of war (i.e., the period of Nazi
rule from 1933 to 1939). Second, events which had transpired in Germany,
Austria (annexed in 1938), and in the parts of Czechoslovakia annexed in
1938/39 were outside the scope of the Decree. Third, the disputed property had
to be in Switzerland. The fact that the pre-war years should have been included
was obvious to the Swiss authorities as early as the beginning of January 1946,
without this prompting them to rectify the Decree accordingly. 45 In March
1946, the Clearing Office also drew the attention of the authorities to the fact
that the restriction to territories occupied during the war would result in injustices,
as dispossessed persons in Germany in particular were not entitled to
claim. And the restriction to «Switzerland as a refuge» meant that the country’s
role as a «hub» was neglected.
The Decree on Looted Assets
The Decree on Looted Assets (Raubgutbeschluss, RGB) constituted a break
with the tradition of Swiss private law in that it gave those who had been
robbed the opportunity to demand restitution of their property in
Switzerland, regardless of the good or bad faith of the current owners (Article
1–3 RGB). The ratification of the Decree on Looted Assets thus temporarily
lifted the protection on acquisition in good faith (as established in the Swiss
Civil Code). A person entitled to claim was a person who had been robbed or
who had surrendered his property as a result of fraud or threat, whereby the
loss of property had to have taken place between 1 September 1939 and
8May 1945 in an occupied («kriegsbesetzt», i.e., occupied by the German
army) territory or, by way of exception, in Switzerland. 46
436