61340 Vorabseiten_e - Unabhängige Expertenkommission Schweiz

was also justified by the argument that an unbridgeable gulf existed between
the Swiss understanding of the law and that of the victorious English-speaking
powers. For example, a report by the Political Department on the Currie negotiations
of March 1945 contains the following:
«For minds fashioned by the Latin and Germanic cultures that determine
the way we think, and for jurists steeped in the sources of Roman law, texts
as imprecise as the Allied declarations of 5 January 1943 and 22 February
1944 or Resolution VI of Bretton Woods – which reflect an infinitely
fluctuating legal conception compared with the Cartesian rigour and
clarity to which we are accustomed – are extremely dangerous because of
the opportunity they offer to make all kinds of interpretations which, if
applied to the letter, would impose onerous obligations on anyone who
signed them.» 51
The aim of all these defensive arguments was to prevent special legislation for
the restitution of victims’ assets. Paradoxically, protection of property was used
as a pretext to block a special regulation which would at least have aspired to
find a solution to the difficult problem of dormant accounts. The banks assumed
that such a special regulation was a «stupid measure» which had to be
prevented. 52 In February 1952, Max Oetterli, Secretary of the Swiss Bankers
Association, stated that:
«The authorities must realise that stability – particularly in lawmaking,
i.e., legal certainty – is vitally important for the development of the Swiss
banking industry. Special laws such as the Washington Agreement, legislation
on looted assets, the obligation to register, and the freezing of
German assets, etc., put this stability at risk. The so-called ‹invisibles›,
however, which play such an important part in Swiss trade and monetary
transactions, depend to a large extent on the reputation that Switzerland
and its governmental and private institutions enjoy at international
level.» 53
Two months later, Jakob Diggelmann informed the Board of Directors of the
Swiss Bankers Association that:
440
«The banks and insurance companies have pointed out that these holdings
and deposits are assets that have been deposited in Switzerland on the basis
of private contracts and a special relationship of trust. It was not right for
the state to interfere in these private contracts. An end should now, finally,