Cyprus

2019 ◽  
pp. 99-102
Author(s):  
Michael J. Bazyler ◽  
Kathryn Lee Boyd ◽  
Kristen L. Nelson ◽  
Rajika L. Shah
Keyword(s):  
World War Ii ◽  
Best Practices ◽  
Concentration Camps ◽  
World War ◽  
British Mandate ◽  
Detention Centers ◽  
Nazi Persecution ◽  
Set Up ◽  
Property Restitution

Cyprus was a British Crown colony during World War II. Cyprus was a haven to refugees escaping Nazi persecution during World War II, and after concentration camps in Europe were liberated, detention centers were set up on the island by the British in an effort to curtail survivors from entering British Mandate Palestine. No immovable property—private, communal, or heirless—was confiscated from Jews or other targeted groups in Cyprus during the war. As a result, no immovable property restitution laws were required. Cyprus endorsed the Terezin Declaration in 2009 and the Guidelines and Best Practices in 2010.

Spain

2019 ◽  
pp. 431-434
Author(s):  
Michael J. Bazyler ◽  
Kathryn Lee Boyd ◽  
Kristen L. Nelson ◽  
Rajika L. Shah
Keyword(s):  
World War Ii ◽  
Best Practices ◽  
National Socialism ◽  
World War ◽  
Francisco Franco ◽  
Anti Jewish ◽  
Property Restitution

Spain is typically described as having been a neutral country during World War II. However, during the war, the Fascist ideology of Spain’s General Francisco Franco was closely aligned to that of the Nazis’ National Socialism. Unlike Hitler’s Germany, however, Franco’s Spain did not enact anti-Jewish policies or engage in the persecution of Jews. More than 25,000 Jews were able to escape Nazi-controlled Europe to Spain during the war. No immovable property—private, communal, or heirless—was taken from Jews or other targeted groups in Spain during the war. As a result, no immovable property restitution laws were required. Spain endorsed the Terezin Declaration in 2009 and the Guidelines and Best Practices in 2010.

Uruguay

2019 ◽  
pp. 479-480
Author(s):  
Michael J. Bazyler ◽  
Kathryn Lee Boyd ◽  
Kristen L. Nelson ◽  
Rajika L. Shah
Keyword(s):  
World War Ii ◽  
Best Practices ◽  
World War ◽  
Property Restitution

Uruguay was a neutral country for most of World War II, but supported the Allied forces at the end of the war. No immovable property—private, communal, or heirless—was taken from Jews or other targeted groups in Uruguay during the war. As a result, no immovable property restitution laws were required. Uruguay endorsed the Terezin Declaration in 2009 and the Guidelines and Best Practices in 2010.

Ireland

2019 ◽  
pp. 193-194
Author(s):  
Michael J. Bazyler ◽  
Kathryn Lee Boyd ◽  
Kristen L. Nelson ◽  
Rajika L. Shah
Keyword(s):  
World War Ii ◽  
Best Practices ◽  
World War ◽  
Republic Of Ireland ◽  
The Republic ◽  
Anti Jewish ◽  
Property Restitution

The Republic of Ireland was neutral during World War II. Ireland was never invaded by Germany, nor were any anti-Jewish laws passed in the country. No immovable property—private, communal, or heirless—was taken from Jews or other targeted groups in Ireland during the war. As a result, no immovable property restitution laws were required. Ireland endorsed the Terezin Declaration in 2009 and the Guidelines and Best Practices in 2010.

Denmark

2019 ◽  
pp. 117-122
Author(s):  
Michael J. Bazyler ◽  
Kathryn Lee Boyd ◽  
Kristen L. Nelson ◽  
Rajika L. Shah
Keyword(s):  
World War Ii ◽  
Best Practices ◽  
State Policy ◽  
Concentration Camps ◽  
World War ◽  
Relative Autonomy ◽  
Property Confiscation

Germany invaded Denmark in 1940. The country was granted relative autonomy until 1943, with the forced deportation of Danish Jews. With the assistance of Danish religious and nonreligious groups, several thousand Danish Jews were transported by boat to neutral Sweden, but hundreds were still captured and sent to concentration camps. There was no state policy of property confiscation during World War II. Immediately after the war, government offices were established and laws passed to assist victims of the occupation with restitution and compensation. Denmark endorsed the Terezin Declaration in 2009 and the Guidelines and Best Practices in 2010.

Croatia

2019 ◽  
pp. 81-98
Author(s):  
Michael J. Bazyler ◽  
Kathryn Lee Boyd ◽  
Kristen L. Nelson ◽  
Rajika L. Shah
Keyword(s):  
World War Ii ◽  
Best Practices ◽  
World War ◽  
The Balkans ◽  
Communal Property ◽  
Yugoslavian Republic ◽  
Second Wave ◽  
Property Restitution

Yugoslavia (which included present-day Croatia) was invaded by the Axis powers in 1941 and immovable property was confiscated. After the war, Yugoslavia enacted a property restitution law, but it was short-lived. As Yugoslavia fell under Communist rule, widespread nationalization—which this time occurred irrespective of race, religion, or ethnicity—resulted in a second wave of property confiscations. It was not until the early 1990s that the post–Yugoslavian Republic of Croatia enacted its first set of denationalization legislation. Croatia’s main restitution laws, however, were not enacted until after the conclusion of the conflicts in the Balkans, which began in 1991 and ended in 1995. Croatia has since passed legislation relating to restitution of private and communal property, albeit with certain key limitations. Ambiguity in one of the main restitution laws left it unclear whether property confiscated during World War II was included. Croatia endorsed the Terezin Declaration in 2009 and the Guidelines and Best Practices in 2010.

Canada

2019 ◽  
pp. 79-80
Author(s):  
Michael J. Bazyler ◽  
Kathryn Lee Boyd ◽  
Kristen L. Nelson ◽  
Rajika L. Shah
Keyword(s):  
World War Ii ◽  
Best Practices ◽  
World War ◽  
Property Restitution

Canada declared war on Germany and was a member of the Allied powers during World War II. No immovable property—private, communal, or heirless—was confiscated from Jews or other targeted groups in Canada during the war. As a result, no immovable property restitution laws were required. Canada endorsed the Terezin Declaration in 2009 and the Guidelines and Best Practices in 2010.

Latvia

2019 ◽  
pp. 213-224
Author(s):  
Michael J. Bazyler ◽  
Kathryn Lee Boyd ◽  
Kristen L. Nelson ◽  
Rajika L. Shah
Keyword(s):  
World War Ii ◽  
Soviet Union ◽  
Best Practices ◽  
Property Rights ◽  
Jewish Community ◽  
Private Property ◽  
World War ◽  
The Soviet Union ◽  
Property Restitution

During World War II, the independent Republic of Latvia was attacked and formally annexed by the Soviet Union in 1940. It was subsequently invaded and occupied by Germany in 1941 until Soviet troops re-entered the country in 1944. Shortly after Latvia’s independence was restored in 1990, Latvia began enacting private property restitution laws. The goal was to undo over 50 years of nationalization and confiscation under Communism and to renew the property rights of all former owners, Jews and non-Jews alike. Latvia was also quick to enact religious property legislation in 1992, albeit with restrictions that uniquely impacted the Jewish community. A portfolio of legislation that returned five additional communal properties was passed by the Parliament in early 2016. No legislation has been enacted dealing specifically with heirless property. Latvia endorsed the Terezin Declaration in 2009 and the Guidelines and Best Practices in 2010.

Finland

2019 ◽  
pp. 133-136
Author(s):  
Michael J. Bazyler ◽  
Kathryn Lee Boyd ◽  
Kristen L. Nelson ◽  
Rajika L. Shah
Keyword(s):  
World War Ii ◽  
Soviet Union ◽  
Best Practices ◽  
Nazi Germany ◽  
World War ◽  
The Soviet Union ◽  
Anti Jewish ◽  
Property Restitution

Between 1939 and 1944, Finland fought two separate wars against the Soviet Union. In 1941, Finland entered World War II aligned with Nazi Germany in its fight against the Soviet Union. Finland was never conquered or occupied by Germany, nor were any anti-Jewish laws passed in the country. No immovable property—private, communal, or heirless—was taken from Jews or other targeted groups in Finland during the war. As a result, no immovable property restitution laws were required. Finland endorsed the Terezin Declaration in 2009 and the Guidelines and Best Practices in 2010.

Australia

2019 ◽  
pp. 9-10
Author(s):  
Michael J. Bazyler ◽  
Kathryn Lee Boyd ◽  
Kristen L. Nelson ◽  
Rajika L. Shah
Keyword(s):  
World War Ii ◽  
Best Practices ◽  
World War ◽  
Property Restitution

Australia declared war on Germany and was a member of the Allied powers during World War II. No immovable property—private, communal, or heirless—was confiscated from Jews or other targeted groups in Australia during the war. As a result, no immovable property restitution laws were required. Australia endorsed the Terezin Declaration in 2009 and the Guidelines and Best Practices in 2010.

Slovenia

2019 ◽  
pp. 415-430
Author(s):  
Michael J. Bazyler ◽  
Kathryn Lee Boyd ◽  
Kristen L. Nelson ◽  
Rajika L. Shah
Keyword(s):  
World War Ii ◽  
Best Practices ◽  
Jewish Community ◽  
Private Property ◽  
World War ◽  
Foreign Nationals ◽  
Communal Property ◽  
The Law ◽  
Second Wave ◽  
Property Restitution

Yugoslavia (which included present-day Slovenia) was occupied by Germany, Italy, and Hungary during World War II, and immovable property was confiscated. Roughly 90 percent of the Jews who lived in Slovenia before World War II were murdered during the war. Postwar Yugoslavia enacted a short-lived property restitution law. As Yugoslavia fell under Communist rule, widespread nationalization resulted in a second wave of property confiscations. Slovenia gained its independence in 1991 and that same year passed a denationalization law, which was later amended to permit foreign nationals to make property claims. The law addresses the restitution of private property nationalized between 1945 and 1963. The law has also been used to gain return of communal property. Some communal property has been returned to the Jewish community in Slovenia, despite lack of specific legislation. Slovenia has not passed legislation for the restitution of heirless property. Slovenia endorsed the Terezin Declaration in 2009 and the Guidelines and Best Practices in 2010.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document