The topic of restitution in UN-Documentation following WW II

Ben Adolff
{"title":"The topic of restitution in UN-Documentation following WW II","authors":"Ben Adolff","doi":"10.5771/2193-7869-2022-3-227","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Based on an examination of the relevant UN-Documentation, this report identifies four notable instances of the topic of restitutions and reparations for victims of the Third Reich appearing as a topic of interest for UN bodies: the provisions made in the interest of refugees as part of the Paris Agreement, the discussion surrounding the draft of the Genocide Convention, as well as the legislative involvement of the International Refugee Organization (IRO) and the Secretary General of the UN (Sec-Gen) in the (later) Federal Republic of Germany (FRG). The funds created by the Paris Agreement are, probably, of the least interest, since they were conceived more as immediate relief than as individualized reparation. The discussion surrounding the Genocide Convention is interesting from a historical standpoint, as it attests an early and acute awareness of the underlying issues. However, any discussion addressing the restitution and reparation of victims of genocide did not find its way into the Convention. The involvement of the IRO with the Office of the Military Government for Germany, United States (OMGUS) and the FRG, which resulted in the drafting of specific laws on the matters of restitution and reparation, is perhaps the most interesting of the instances noted here. Potentially, the IRO played a significant role in the move towards restitution during the short years of its existence. Further investigations based on sources other than UN Documentation could reveal the extent to which the IRO was materially involved in the drafting of specific laws. The efforts of the Sec-Gen towards the reparation of victims of “medical” experimentation provides great insight into the process by which one such issue was discovered and addressed within the UN at the time. Beyond that, this is an instance in which there is a deeper understanding of the specific involvement of a UN-body with German reparatory legislation. In this case, it amounted to bringing up the issue and urging appropriate action without much involvement in the particulars of the resulting measures. Overall, it should be summarized that there was no consolidated or systematic effort towards the restitution of victims of the Third Reich on the parts of the UN. Rather, the issue appeared and reappeared with some frequency and only in certain cases did the UN take action.","PeriodicalId":275616,"journal":{"name":"Kritische Vierteljahresschrift für Gesetzgebung und Rechtswissenschaft","volume":"25 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Kritische Vierteljahresschrift für Gesetzgebung und Rechtswissenschaft","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5771/2193-7869-2022-3-227","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Based on an examination of the relevant UN-Documentation, this report identifies four notable instances of the topic of restitutions and reparations for victims of the Third Reich appearing as a topic of interest for UN bodies: the provisions made in the interest of refugees as part of the Paris Agreement, the discussion surrounding the draft of the Genocide Convention, as well as the legislative involvement of the International Refugee Organization (IRO) and the Secretary General of the UN (Sec-Gen) in the (later) Federal Republic of Germany (FRG). The funds created by the Paris Agreement are, probably, of the least interest, since they were conceived more as immediate relief than as individualized reparation. The discussion surrounding the Genocide Convention is interesting from a historical standpoint, as it attests an early and acute awareness of the underlying issues. However, any discussion addressing the restitution and reparation of victims of genocide did not find its way into the Convention. The involvement of the IRO with the Office of the Military Government for Germany, United States (OMGUS) and the FRG, which resulted in the drafting of specific laws on the matters of restitution and reparation, is perhaps the most interesting of the instances noted here. Potentially, the IRO played a significant role in the move towards restitution during the short years of its existence. Further investigations based on sources other than UN Documentation could reveal the extent to which the IRO was materially involved in the drafting of specific laws. The efforts of the Sec-Gen towards the reparation of victims of “medical” experimentation provides great insight into the process by which one such issue was discovered and addressed within the UN at the time. Beyond that, this is an instance in which there is a deeper understanding of the specific involvement of a UN-body with German reparatory legislation. In this case, it amounted to bringing up the issue and urging appropriate action without much involvement in the particulars of the resulting measures. Overall, it should be summarized that there was no consolidated or systematic effort towards the restitution of victims of the Third Reich on the parts of the UN. Rather, the issue appeared and reappeared with some frequency and only in certain cases did the UN take action.
第二次世界大战后联合国文件中的归还问题
根据对联合国相关文件的审查,本报告确定了第三帝国受害者的赔偿和赔偿作为联合国机构感兴趣的主题出现的四个值得注意的实例:《巴黎协定》中为难民利益制定的条款,围绕《灭绝种族罪公约》草案的讨论,以及国际难民组织(IRO)和联合国秘书长(secgen)在(后来的)德意志联邦共和国(FRG)的立法参与。《巴黎协定》(Paris Agreement)设立的基金可能是最不受关注的,因为它们更多地被视为即时救济,而不是个性化的赔偿。从历史的角度来看,围绕《灭绝种族罪公约》的讨论是有趣的,因为它证明了对基本问题的早期和敏锐的认识。但是,关于种族灭绝受害者的恢复和赔偿的任何讨论都没有进入《公约》。该组织与德国和美国军政府办公室(政府间办事处)和联邦政府的合作,从而起草了关于恢复和赔偿事项的具体法律,这也许是这里提到的最令人感兴趣的实例。在其存在的短短几年中,税务局可能在恢复原状方面发挥了重要作用。根据联合国文件以外的来源进行的进一步调查可以揭示税务组织在多大程度上实质性地参与了具体法律的起草。秘书长为“医学”实验受害者的赔偿所作的努力,使我们能够深入了解当时在联合国内部发现和解决这一问题的过程。除此之外,这是一个对联合国机构具体参与德国赔偿立法有更深理解的例子。在这种情况下,它相当于提出这个问题并敦促采取适当行动,而不太参与所产生措施的细节。总的来说,应该总结的是,在归还第三帝国受害者方面,联合国方面没有统一的或系统的努力。相反,这一问题以某种频率出现并再次出现,联合国只在某些情况下才采取行动。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信