Make a Submission
Vol. 41 (2021)
Jubilee article

War Reparations and Individual Claims in the Context of Polish-German Relations

PDF
  • Jerzy Kranz
Jerzy Kranz
Kozminski University (Warsaw)

Published 2022-06-30

Keywords

  • war reparations,
  • individual compensation,
  • international responsibility,
  • Potsdam Conference (1945),
  • peace settlement with Germany,
  • 2 4 Treaty,
  • Wiedergutmachung,
  • Polish-German relations
    • ...More
    Less

Copyright (c) 2022 Polish Yearbook of International Law

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

How to Cite

War Reparations and Individual Claims in the Context of Polish-German Relations. (2022). Polish Yearbook of International Law, 41, 121-141. https://doi.org/10.24425/PYIL.2022.142343

Abstract

The issue of war reparations was a subject of controversy in Polish-German relations for a long time. This was due to the position of the Federal Republic of Germany that this issue had been deferred to the moment of German unifcation.
The German concept of reparations also included the individual claims of Polish victims of National Socialism (Nazism). The case for interstate reparations from Germany to Poland was closed as a result of the Polish waiver of 1953, while the issue of individual compensation for Polish victims was symbolically resolved as a result of agreements between Poland and the Federal Republic of Germany only in 1990 and 2000. The scope and amount of any new payments depends on the agreements of particular countries or organizations with the Federal Republic of Germany. As long as the victims are still alive, new pragmatic solutions should not be ruled out.

PDF

References

  1. Accord relatif au rétablissement des relations normales entre la République populaire de Pologne et le Japon, 8 février 1957, Journal of Laws 1957, No. 49, item 233.
  2. Agreement between the State of Israel and the Federal Republic of Germany, Luxembourg, 10 September 1952.
  3. Agreement in the form of exchange of notes on the payment by the German government of DM 500 million to the account of the “Polish-German Reconciliation Foundation”, 16 October 1991.
  4. Agreement on German External Debts, London, 27 February 1953.
  5. Agreement on Reparation from Germany, on the Establishment of an Inter-Allied Reparation Agency and on the Restitution of Monetary Gold, Paris, 14 January 1946.
  6. Agreement on the Settlement of Problems Concerning Property and Claims and on Economic Cooperation between Japan and the Republic of Korea, 22 June 1965, Art. II.1.
  7. Amnesty International, Germany v. Italy: The Right to Deny State Immunity When Victims Have No Other Recourse, 24 November 2011, available at: https://www.amnesty.org/en/documents/ior53/006/2011/en/ (accessed 30 June 2022).
  8. Announcement by Foreign Ministers of Japan and the Republic of Korea at the Joint Press Occasion, 28 December 2015, available at: https://www.mofa.go.jp/a_o/na/kr/page4e_000364.html (accessed 30 June 2022).
  9. Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 (AEDPA).
  10. Augenstein D., Paradise Lost: Sovereign State Interest, Global Resource Exploitation and the Politics of Human Rights, 27(3) European Journal of International Law 669 (2016), pp. 669-691.
  11. Barcz J., Jałowiecki B., Kranz J., Między pamięcią a odpowiedzialnością. Rokowania w latach 1998-2000 w sprawie świadczeń za pracę przymusową [Between memory and responsibility. Negotiations in 1998-2000 on benefits for those subjected to forced labor], Prawo i Praktyka Gospodarcza, Warszawa: 2004.
  12. Barcz J., Kranz J., Reparacje od Niemiec po drugiej wojnie światowej w świetle prawa międzynarodowego. Aspekty prawa i praktyki [German reparations after the Second World War in the light of international law. Legal aspects and practice], Elipsa, Warszawa: 2019.
  13. Blumenwitz D., Das Offenhalten der Vermögensfrage in den deutsch-polnischen Beziehungen, Bonn: 1992.
  14. Boggero G., The Legal Implications of Sentenza No. 238/2014 by Italy’s Constitutional Court for Italian Municipal Judges: Is Overcoming the “Triepelian Approach” Possible?, 76 Zeitschrift für ausländisches öffentliches Recht und Völkerrecht 203 (2016), pp. 203-224.
  15. Bothe M., Remedies of Victims of War Crimes and Crimes against Humanities: Some Critical Remarks on the ICJ’s Judgment on the Jurisdictional Immunity of States, in: A. Peters et al. (eds.), Immunities in the Age of Global Constitutionalism, Brill, Leiden-Boston: 2014.
  16. Bufalini A., On the Power of a State to Waive Reparation Claims Arising from War Crimes and Crimes against Humanity, 77 Zeitschrift für ausländisches öffentliches Recht und Völkerrecht 465 (2017), pp. 447-470.
  17. Bundesgerichtshof, Judgment of 2 November 2006 (III ZR 190/05); Bundesgerichtshof, Judgment of 26 June 2003 (III ZR 245/98) [29](a).
  18. Bundesgerichtshof, Judgment of 6 October 2016 (III ZR 140/15), Rdnr. 16.
  19. Bundesministerium der Finanzen in Zusammenarbeit mit Walter Schwarz (ed.), Die Wiedergutmachung nationalsozialistischen Unrechts durch die Bundesrepublik Deutschland, 6 Bde., München: 1973.
  20. Bundesverfassungsgericht (BVerfG), Decision of the Second Senate of 13 May 1996, 2 BvL 33/93 (Rdnr. 24, 56, 57).
  21. Bundesverfassungsgericht, Decision of 28 June 2004 (2 BvR 1379/01), Rdnr. 38.
  22. Buxbaum R.M., From Paris to London: The Legal History of European Reparation Claims: 1946-1953, 31(2) Berkeley Journal of International Law 323 (2013).
  23. BVerfG. Beschluß vom 13. Januar 1976 in den Verfahren über die Verfassungsbeschwerden gegen das Reparationsschädengesetz vom 12. Februar 1969.
  24. Constitutional Court of Korea, Challenge against Act of Omission Involving Article 3 of the Agreement on the Settlement of Problem concerning Property and Claims and the Economic Cooperation between the Republic of Korea and Japan [1965], 2006Hun-Ma788, KCCR: 23-2(A) KCCR 366, 30 August 2011.
  25. Convention on relations between the Three Powers and the Federal Republic of Germany, Bonn, May 26, 1952 (as amended by Schedule I to the Protocol on the Termination of the Occupation Regime in the Federal Republic of Germany signed at Paris on 23 October 1954) [Deutschlandvertrag] Arts. 2 and 7, Bundesgesetzblatt II, 1955, No. 8 of 31 March 1955.
  26. Convention on the Settlement of Matters Arising out of the War and the Occupation, Bonn, 26 May 1952 (as amended by Schedule IV to the Protocol on the termination of the Occupation Regime in the Federal Republic of Germany signed at Paris on October 23, 1954) [Überleitungsvertrag], Bundesgesetzblatt 1955.
  27. Court dismisses comfort women’s suit against government for signing 2015 agreement with Japan, Hani, 17 June 2018, available at: http://english.hani.co.kr/arti/english_edition/e_international/849403.html (accessed 30 June 2022).
  28. Czapliński W., L’immunité de l’Etat devant la Cour suprême polonaise: l’affaire Natoniewski, 56 Annuaire français de droit international 217 (2010), pp. 217-225.
  29. Czapliński W., Łukańko B. (eds.), Problemy prawne w stosunkach polsko-niemieckich u progu XXI wieku [Legal problems in Polish-German relations at the threshold of the 21st century], Wydawnictwo Scholar, Warszawa: 2009.
  30. Czapliński W., Pojęcie reparacji wojennych w prawie międzynarodowym. Reparacje po drugiej wojnie światowej [The concept of war reparations in international law and reparations after the Second World War], 1 Sprawy Międzynarodowe 66 (2005), pp. 66-78.
  31. d’Argent P., Les réparations de guerre en droit international public: la responsabilité internationale des Etats à l’épreuve de la guerre, Brulyant, Bruxelles: 2002.
  32. Declaration Regarding the Defeat of Germany and the Assumption of Supreme Authority by Allied Powers, 5 June 1945.
  33. District Court for the District of Columbia, Cynthia Warmbier, et al., v. Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Judgement of 24 December 2018.
  34. Doehring K., Fehn B.J., Hockerts H.G., Jahrhundertschuld, Jahrhundertsühne: Reparationen, Wiedergutmachung, Entschädigung für nationalsozialistisches Kriegs- und Verfolgungsunrecht, Olzog, München: 2001.
  35. Dörr O., Schmalenbach K. (eds.), Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties. A Commentary, Springer, Berlin-Heidelberg: 2012.
  36. Eckerd P., South Korea court orders Mitsubishi of Japan to pay for forced labor during WWII, 29 November 2018, Jurist, 29 November 2018, available at: https://bit.ly/3MV3eBe (accessed 30 June 2022).
  37. ECtHR, Al-Adsani v. United Kingdom (App. No. 35763/97), 21 November 2001.
  38. ECtHR, Jones et al. v. United Kingdom (App. nos. 34356/06 and 40528/06), 14 January 2014.
  39. Eritrea Ethiopia Claims Commission, Eritrea’s Damages Claims between The State of Eritrea and The Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia, Final Award, The Hague, 17 August 2009.
  40. Féaux de la Croix E., H. Rumpf, Der Werdegang des Entschädigungsrechts unter national- und völkerrechtlichem und politologischem Aspekt, in: Die Wiedergutmachung nationalsozialistischen Unrechts durch die Bundesrepublik Deutschland, vol. 3, München: 1985.
  41. Final protocol on deliveries made to the People’s Republic of Poland on account of its participation in reparations from Germany, 4 July 1957, in: S. Dębski, W.M. Góralski (eds.), Problem reparacji, odszkodowań i świadczeń w stosunkach polsko-niemieckich 1944-2004 [Problem of reparations, compensation and payments in the Polish-German relations 1944-2004], PISM, Warszawa: 2004, vol. II.
  42. Fischer M., Der Zwei-plus-Vier Vertrag und die reparationsberechtigten Drittstaaten, 78 Zeitschrift für ausländisches öffentliches Recht und Völkerrecht 1016 (2018), pp. 1003-1041.
  43. Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (FSIA) of 1976.
  44. Gesetz zur Errichtung einer Stiftung “Erinnerung, Verantwortung und Zukunft” vom 2. August 2000, in: Kraft getreten am 12. August 2000, Bundesgesetzblatt 2000 I 1263.
  45. Goschler C., Schuld und Schulden. Die Politik der Wiedergutmachung für NS-Verfolgte seit 1945, Wallstein Verlag, Göttingen: 2005.
  46. Góralski W.M. (ed.), Breakthrough and Challenges, 20 Years of the Polish-German Treaty on Good Neighbourliness and Friendly Relations, Elipsa, Warszawa: 2011.
  47. Góralski W.M., Dębski S., (eds.), Problem reparacji, odszkodowań i świadczeń w stosunkach polsko-niemieckich 1944-2004 [Problem of reparations, compensation and payments in the Polish-German relations 1944-2004], PISM, Warszawa: 2004.
  48. Hockerts H.-G., Moisel C., Winstel T. (eds.), Grenzen der Wiedergutmachung. Die Entschädigung für NSVerfolgte in West- und Osteuropa 1945-2000, Wallstein Verlag, Göttingen: 2006.
  49. Hofmann R., Compensation for Personal Damages Suffered during World War II, in: Max Planck Encyclopedia of Public International Law (MPEPIL), February 2013, available at: https://bit.ly/3z4v3D0 (accessed 30 June 2022).
  50. ICJ, Case Concerning the Frontiers Dispute (Burkina Faso/Republic of Mali), Judgment, 22 December 1986, ICJ Rep 1986.
  51. ICJ, Jurisdictional Immunities of the State (Germany v. Italy: Greece Intervening), Judgment, 3 February 2012, ICJ Rep 2012, p. 99.
  52. ICJ, Jurisdictional Immunities of the State (Germany v. Italy: Greece intervening), Dissenting Opinion of Judge Cançado Trindade, para. 72.
  53. ILA, Resolution 1/2014: Reparation for Victims of Armed Conflict. Procedural Principles for Reparation Mechanisms.
  54. ILA, Resolution No 2/2010 (supra note 11).
  55. Information from the Federal Government, Bundestag-Drucksache 13/4787 of 3 June 1996.
  56. International Law Association (ILA), Resolution No 2/2010: Declaration of International Law Principles on Reparation for Victims of Armed Conflict (Substantive Issues), 2010.
  57. International Law Commission (ILC), Draft Articles on Responsibility of States for Internationally Wrongful Acts with commentaries (ARSIWA), Yearbook of the International Law Commission, 2001, vol. II, Part Two, Arts. 31-39.
  58. International Law Commission, Draft articles on crimes against humanity, Yearbook of the International Law Commission, 2019, vol. II, Part Two.
  59. Interview of the Prime Minister of the Republic of Poland for German newspapers from the Funke- Mediengruppe group on 21 August 2019.
  60. Jakubowski A., State Succession in Cultural Property, Oxford University Press, Oxford: 2015.
  61. Japanese Supreme Court, Nishimatsu Construction Co. v. Song Jixiao et al., Judgment of 27 April 2007.
  62. Japanese Supreme Court, Nishimatsu Construction Co. v. Song Jixiao et al., Judgment, 27 April 2007.
  63. Jarząbek W., Władze Polskiej Rzeczypospolitej Ludowej wobec problemu reparacji i odszkodowań od Republiki Federalnej Niemiec 1953-1989 [The authorities of the Polish People’s Republic in the face of the problem of reparations and compensations from the Federal Republic of Germany 1953-1989], XXXVII(2) Dzieje Najnowsze 85 (2005), pp. 83-105.
  64. Jurisdictional Immunities of the State (Germany v. Italy), Rejoinder of Italy, 10 January 2011, para. 3.13.
  65. Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism Act (JASTA) of 2016.
  66. Keitner C.I., Authority and Dialogue: State and Official Immunity in Domestic and International Courts, in: G. Chiara, V. Guglielmo (eds.), Whither the West? Concepts of International Law in Europe and the United States, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge: 2021.
  67. Kischel U., Wiedergutmachungsrecht und Reparationen: Zur Dogmatik der Kriegsfolgen, 52(3) Juristen Zeitung 126 (1997), pp. 126-131.
  68. Kramer H., Uhl K., Wagner J.-Ch. (eds.), Zwangsarbeit im Nationalsozialismus und die Rolle der Justiz. Täterschaft, Nachkriegsprozesse und die Auseinandersetzung um Entschädigungsleistungen, Stiftung Gedenkstätten Buchenwald und Mittelbau-Dora, Nordhausen: 2007.
  69. Kranz J., L’affaire Allemagne contre Italie ou les dilemmes du droit et de la justice, in: A. Peters et al. (eds.), Immunities in the Age of Global Constitutionalism, Brill, Leiden-Boston: 2014.
  70. Kranz J., Wollt ihr den totalen Krieg? Political, Moral and Legal Aspects of the Resettlement of German Population After World War II, 7(2) Polish Review of International and European Law 9 (2018), pp. 9-119.
  71. Kranz J., Zwangsarbeit – 50 Jahre danach: Bemerkungen aus polnischer Sicht, in: K. Barwig, G. Saathof, N. Weyde (eds.), Entschädigung für NS-Zwangsarbeit. Rechtliche, historische und politische Aspekte, Nomos, Baden-Baden: 1998.
  72. Küsters H.-J., Hofmann D. (eds.), Deutsche Einheit. Dokumente zur Deutschlandpolitik. Sonderedition aus den Akten des Bundeskanzleramtes 1989/90, München 1998.
  73. Laly-Chevalier C., Rezek F., Article 35, in: O. Corten, P. Klein (eds.), Les Conventions de Vienne sur le droit des traités. Commentaire article par article, Bruylant, Bruxelles: 2006.
  74. Landgericht Bonn, Judgment of 5 November 1997 (10 134/92).
  75. Lehmann-Richter A., Auf der Suche nach den Grenzen der Wiedergutmachung, BWV, Berlin: 2008.
  76. Loi portant sur l’immunité des États étrangers devant les tribunaux (1985), Art. 6(1).
  77. Lorentz C., La France et les restitutions allemandes au lendemain de la seconde guerre mondiale (1943-1954), Ministère des affaires étrangères, Direction des archives et de la documentation, Paris: 1998.
  78. Marotta M., South Korea court orders Japan steelmaker to compensate WWII slave laborers, Jurist, 31 October 2018, available at: https://bit.ly/3GmZTse (accessed 30 June 2022).
  79. Memorandum of the Polish government to the conference of deputy foreign ministers on Germany, London, January 1947, in: S. Dębski, W.M. Góralski (eds.), Problem reparacji, odszkodowań i świadczeń w stosunkach polsko-niemieckich 1944-2004 [Problem of reparations, compensation and payments in the Polish-German relations 1944-2004], PISM, Warszawa: 2004, vol. II.
  80. Paech N., Staatenimmunität und Kriegsverbrechen, 47 Archiv des Völkerrechts 36 (2009), pp. 36-92.
  81. Paris Reparations Treaty (1946).
  82. Pawlita C., “Wiedergutmachung” als Rechtsfrage? Die politische und juristische Auseinandersetzung um Entschädigung für die Opfer nationalsozialistischer Verfolgung (1945 bis 1990), Peter Lang, Frankfurt a.M.: 1993.
  83. PCIJ, Factory At Chorzów (Claim for Indemnity) (The Merits), Judgment, 13 September 1928, Recueil, série A, no. 17.
  84. Polish Supreme Court, Winicjusz Natoniewski v. Republika Federalna Niemiec, IV CSK 465/09, 29 October 2010.
  85. Protokoll zwischen der UdSSR und der DDR über den Erlaß der deutschen Reparationszahlungen und über andere Maßnahmen zur Erleichterung der finanziellen und wirtschaftlichen Verpflichtungen der Deutschen Demokratischen Republik, die mit den Folgen des Krieges verbunden sind, vom 22. August 1953 – Europa-Archiv (1953).
  86. Regulations Respecting the Laws and Customs of War on Land (1907), Annex to the Convention Hague IV.
  87. Resolution of the State Council of 18 February 1955 on ending the state of war between the Polish People’s Republic and Germany – Monitor Polski 1955.17.172.
  88. Response (13 August 2015) of the Undersecretary of State at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs to interpellation no. 33816.
  89. Response of the Undersecretary of State at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (8 August 2017) to interpellation no. 3812; Response (2 July 2012) of the Undersecretary of State at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs to interpellation no. 5933.
  90. Ruchniewicz K., Polskie zabiegi o odszkodowania niemieckie w latach 1944/45-1977 [Polish actions for compensation from Germany between 1944/45-1977], Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Wrocławskiego, Wrocław: 2007.
  91. Rumpf H., Die deutsche Frage und die Reparationen, 33 Zeitschrift für ausländisches öffentliches Recht und Völkerrecht 344 (1973), pp. 344-371.
  92. Rumpf H., Die deutschen Reparationen nach dem Zweiten Weltkrieg. Völkerrechtswidrige Entnahmen vor einem Friedensvertrag, 33(3) Deutschland in Geschichte und Gegenwart 10 (1985).
  93. Rumpf H., Die Regelung der deutschen Reparationen nach dem Zweiten Weltkrieg, 23(1/2) Archiv des Völkerrechts 74 (1985), pp. 74-101.
  94. Schweisfurth Th., International Treaties and Third States, 45 Zeitschrift für ausländisches öffentliches Recht und Völkerrecht 670 (1985).
  95. Statement by the Government of the People’s Republic of Poland on the decision of the Government of the USSR regarding Germany, Warsaw, 23 August 1953, Zbiór Dokumentów 1953, no. 9, pp. 1830-1832.
  96. Sullo P., Wyatt J., War Reparations, in: Max Planck Encyclopedia of Public International Law (MPEPIL), September 2015, available at: https://bit.ly/3t1Tr4a (accessed 30 June 2022).
  97. Supreme Court of Canada, Kazemi Estate v. Islamic Republic of Iran, SCC 62, 10 October 2014.
  98. Supreme Court of the United States, Kiobel v. Royal Dutch Petroleum Co. et Al., No. 10-1491, 17 April 2013.
  99. Supreme Court, Bank Markazi, Aka Central Bank of Iran v. Peterson et al., Judgment of 20 April 2016.
  100. Tomuschat C., Individual Reparation Claims in Instances of Grave Human Rights Violations: The Position under General International Law, in: A. Randelzhofer, C. Tomuschat (eds.), State Responsibility and the Individual, Reparation in Instances of Grave Violations of Human Rights, Kluwer Law International, The Hague: 1999.
  101. Tomuschat Ch., Article 75, in: O. Corten, P. Klein (eds.), Les Conventions de Vienne sur le droit des traités. Commentaire article par article, Bruylant, Bruxelles: 2006.
  102. Tomuschat Ch., The international law of state immunity and its development by national institutions, 44 Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law 1105 (2011), pp. 1105-1140.
  103. Torture Victim Protection Act (TVPA) of 1992.
  104. Tracy v. Iran, 2017 ONCA 549 (CanLII).
  105. Treaty of Peace with Bulgaria, Paris, 10 February 1947.
  106. Treaty of Peace with Hungary (1947).
  107. Treaty of Peace with Italy (1947).
  108. Treaty of Peace with Japan (1951).
  109. Treaty of Peace with Japan, San Francisco, 8 September 1951.
  110. Treaty of Peace with Roumania (1947).
  111. UN General Assembly, Resolution 60/147: Basic Principles and Guidelines on the Right to A Remedy and Reparation for Victims of Gross Violations of International Human Rights Law and Serious Violations of International Humanitarian Law, 16 December 2005.
  112. United Nations Convention on Jurisdictional Immunities of States and their Property (2004).
  113. United Nations. Economic and Social Council. Commission of Human Rights, Question of the Punishment of War Criminals and of Persons Who Have Committed Crimes Against Humanity (Note by the Secretary-General), E/CN.4/1010, 24 November 1969.
  114. United States District Court, Southern District of New York, Rukoro et al. v. Federal Republic of Germany, Opinion & Order, 6 March 2019.
  115. US Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, Filártiga v. Peña-Irala, 630 F.2d 876, 30 June 1980.
  116. US Court of Appeals, District of Columbia Circuit, Hugo Princz v. Federal Republic of Germany, 26 F. 3d 1166, 1 July 1994.
  117. US Court of Appeals, District of Columbia Circuit, Hwang Geum Joo, et al., v. Japan, 413 F.3d 45 (D.C. Cir. 2005), 28 June 2005.
  118. US District Court for New Jersey, Brief of the Republic of Poland as amicus curiae in Burger-Fischer v. Degussa AG, 28 July 1999, available at: https://bit.ly/3t0LDQm (accessed 30 June 2022).
  119. US District Court for the District of New Jersey, Burger-Fischer v. Degussa AG, 65 F. Supp. 2d 248 (1999), 21 September 1999; US District Court for the District of New Jersey, Iwanowa v. Ford Motor Co., 67 F. Supp. 2d 424 (D.N.J. 1999), 28 October 1999.
  120. US District Court for the Eastern District of New York, Swiss Banks Settlement: In re Holocaust Victim Assets Litigation.
  121. US District Court for the Northern District of California, In re World War II Era Japanese Forced Labor Litigation, 114 F. Supp 2d 939 (N.D. Cal. 2000), 21 September 2000.
  122. Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (signed 23 May 1969, entered into force 27 January 1980), 1155 UNTS 331.
  123. Villiger M.E., Commentary on the 1969 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, Martinus Nijhoff, Leiden: 2009.
  124. Webb P., International Law and Restraints on the Exercise of Jurisdiction by National Courts, in: M.D. Evans (ed.), International Law, Oxford University Press, Oxford: 2018, pp. 316-348.

Similar Articles

You may also start an advanced similarity search for this article.