61340 Vorabseiten_e - Unabhängige Expertenkommission Schweiz

Learning processes of the 1990s
In the 1990s, the treatment of Jewish (and other) Holocaust victims by the
banks again became a controversial issue. In 1999, based on the results of its
extensive investigations, the «Volcker Committee» (ICEP), which had been
established in 1996, found that of the total of 6,858,100 accounts which the
banks had assumed to exist between 1933 and 1945, information was still
available on 4,100,000 accounts. Of these, 53,886, or according to the latest
estimates 36,132, accounts, possibly belonged to victims of Nazi persecution;
417 of these had been paid out to the Nazi authorities at the time. The lion’s
share of these accounts were with the big commercial banks (89.8%) while
cantonal banks held 8.9% and private banks only an insignificant percentage
(1.3%). Of these accounts, 2,726 were «open and dormant», 983 were «closed
for dividends» and 1322 «closed for fees». 30,692 accounts were investigated
only on the basis of circumstantial evidence, the reasons leading to their closure
remain «unknown». 88
All in all, the investigations by the ICE, which are borne out by the findings of
the «Volcker Committee», have made two things clear: first, the volume of the
assets of Holocaust victims was much larger than the banks maintained or
believed immediately after the war and after the Registration Decree of 1962.
The ICEP process also led to a change of view on the part of the Swiss. The banks
began to take a critical look at their own actions in the 50 years after the war
ended. For example, in 1997 one of the major banks stated that:
«Viewed from today’s perspective, our institution’s behaviour towards your
mother must clearly be described as untenable. Although the refusal to
provide any information on the account held by the late Mr. Felix L. may
have been in line with the legal view and practice prevailing in Switzerland
at the time, the fact that your family’s case was proved to be justified was
completely ignored. We should like to apologise unreservedly to you and
your family and assure you that the attitude manifested in this case in no
way reflects our approach today.» 89
The higher figures that came to light during the investigations in the 1990s,
make it clear once again that the Swiss banks had made but token efforts to
contact their customers after 1945. This is true even when taking account of the
fact that it was very difficult in the years prior to 1989 or 1991 to safeguard the
interests of customers whose last known place of residence was in the Eastern
Bloc. The banks also consistently attempted to play down the extent of the
problem in public.
Second, however, it should also be stated that the pace of growth in the Swiss
456