White Paper No. 82 to the Storting
(1997-98)
Historical and moral settlement
for the treatment in Norway of the economic liquidation
of the Jewish minority during World War II
Recommendations by the Ministry of Justice and the Police of 26 June
1998, approved by The King in Council on the same day
1 Main contents of the White Paper
The Ministry of Justice hereby submits a White Paper to the Storting on
historical and moral settlement for the treatment in Norway of the
economic liquidation of the Jewish minority during World War II. The
economic liquidation of the group as a whole was unique, and the organized
arrest, deportation and physical destruction of the Jews was genocide.
Since the aim was to completely destroy the Jewish group in Norway, the
economic and physical liquidation must be regarded as two parts of the
same crime. The proposition is based among other things on the work of the
Skarpnes Committee, which was published in Official Norwegian Report (NOU)
1997:22, "Confiscation of Jewish Assets in Norway during World War II".
The report made clear what economic consequences it had for the surviving
Jews that the rules for reparation applied after the war did not take
sufficient account of the Holocaust, i.e. the Nazis' genocide against the
Jews.
In the White Paper the Ministry of Justice proposes that the historic
and moral settlement is given economic expression by making collective and
individual settlements. The collective settlement is proposed to consist
of three parts. The first is the allocation of a sum to ensure the
preservation of Jewish culture and the future of the Jewish community in
Norway. Secondly, it is proposed to support efforts outside Norway to
commemorate and develop the traditions and culture that the Nazis sought
to eradicate. Finally, it is proposed to set up a resource centre on the
Holocaust and on religious minorities' position and history in general. It
is proposed that the individual compensation should take the form of a ex
gratia payment to persons in Norway who were affected by the anti-Jewish
measures during the war.
This White Paper has been drawn up in close collaboration with
representatives of the Jewish community in Norway.
The Ministry of Justice wishes by these means to make a worthy final
settlement.
2 Background
A number of individuals had their property seized by the Nazi occupation
authorities and the Quisling regime during World War II, but of these it
was the Jews who were by far the most seriously affected as a group. The
seizure of property belonging to the Jewish community was an integral part
of the Nazi's attempt to eradicate the entire Jewish community in Norway.
The first measures against the Jewish population in Norway were
initiated in May 1940, when radios belonging to Jews were confiscated.
This was followed by the registration of real estate owned by Jews,
special stamps on Jewish identity documents, economic liquidation and
arrests, culminating in the period of November 1942 to March 1943 in the
deportation of Jews from Norway to Auschwitz.
The general rules governing seizures made during the period 1940 to 1943
were directed at members of the Norwegian government-in-exile in London
and their administration-in-exile, members of the resistance movement and
people who had left the country illegally since the invasion in 1940.
In addition to these general rules, in October 1942 the Quisling regime
adopted certain special provisions concerning the seizure of property
belonging to Jews in Norway. The law laid down that property of any kind
belonging to Jews in Norway should be seized by the state, including
property belonging to the spouses and children of Jews.
It is estimated that the number of Jews in Norway before the war and up
to the arrests in 1942 amounted to about 2 200. Seven hundred and
sixty-seven Jews were deported from Norway, mainly to Auschwitz, and of
these only 30 survived. Two hundred and thirty families were completely
eradicated. Those who were not deported fled the country, mainly to
Sweden. There were also about 50 Jews imprisoned in Norway and about 10
who remained in the country in hiding. Every person who was defined as a
Jew by the Nazi authorities had his or her property seized.
In accordance with special rules for Jews, which were introduced by
agreement between the Quisling regime and the German occupation
authorities, the seized gold, silver and jewellery belonging to Jews was
taken out of the country without being registered. Other valuable goods
were also not registered, and some property was plundered and thus not
officially seized. Property was also given to Nazi organizations and
individuals.
A special institution was set up to administer the seized property,
called the Liquidation Board for Confiscated Jewish Property, but this
also began administering property seized from other Norwegians as the war
went on. The Jewish estates were liquidated while they continued to exist
as legal persons even when the physical persons had been killed. This
meant that taxes and other costs continued to accrue right up until the
estates were finally settled after the war. In this way 163 Jewish estates
were in debit, since they owed money to the Reparations Office, and the
survivors were made liable for these sums, cf. NOU 1997: 22, page 97. At
the end of the occupation the archives of the Liquidation Board contained
information on about 11 500 to 12 000 estates whose property had been
partly or entirely taken over by the Nazi regime. Of these 1 053 were
Jewish and involved about 2 000 people. Between 7 000 and 8 000 estates
were registered as no assets estates, i.e. funds had not been transferred
either into or out of the Liquidation Board's accounts, and these were,
with a few exceptions, non-Jewish estates.
There were several reasons for the no assets estates of the non-Jewish.
These were, in the main, a) that the seizure was only pro forma, so that
the property was registered but not expropriated or sold, b) that the
owners had no assets or had managed to hide them, or c) that the estate
had been plundered before being registered. The reasons for the 118 Jewish
no assets estates were either a) that in accordance with the rules of the
Quisling regime the property was to be kept out of the registration and
therefore of the common fund, or b) that the estates had been plundered
before registration.
The operation of the Liquidation Board was financed by the seized
assets. Much of the property was sold as soon as possible after the
seizure, often at public auction. The money obtained by the realization of
the seized property was put into the Liquidation Board's account and
constituted a common fund.
After the war three institutions were established to ensure the return
or replacement of the confiscated property:
- the Reparations Office for Confiscated Assets (the Reparations
Office),
- the Offices for War Damage to Buildings and Movable Property,
- the Settlements Division of the Ministry of Justice.
The Settlements Division took care of all the cases that did not come
under the sphere of the other institutions. One of its major activities
was dealing with ex gratia compensation pursuant to Provisional Act No. 4
of 25 April 1947 relating to compensation for certain damages and losses
resulting from the war in 1940-1945, etc.
The Reparations Office took over all the archives of the Liquidation
Board and used this information in addition to claims registered after the
war to carry out its tasks. These tasks consisted mainly of returning
property that had been traced to the rightful owners or of providing
compensation for objects that had disappeared. This was done on condition
that the property had been registered by the Liquidation Board during the
war.
The rules laid down by the occupation authorities were invalid under
civil law, and everything that had been seized could in theory be claimed
by the rightful owner irrespective of whether or not the new owner had
acquired it in good faith. The extent and value of the seized assets that
were returned to their rightful owners after the war are not known, but
there was a considerable amount of property that was returned in kind. The
bulk of real estate, for example, was returned. Here, however, there was a
difference between the Jews and other Norwegians. Since so many Jews had
been killed, sometimes whole families, a considerable number of objects
could not be returned to their rightful owners.
The authorities paid compensation in the form of a dividend of the
registered value of seized property that had been registered in the
Liquidation Board's common fund. The rest of the common fund had been used
to finance the liquidation process and to pay taxes during and after the
war. The question of coverage of the expenses to which the Liquidation
Board had put the beneficiaries (the owners of the assets that constituted
the common fund) was discussed after the war. Both the Reparations Office
and the Ministry of Justice considered that the state should make up the
difference in cases where there were not enough assets to meet the
beneficiaries' claims completely. However, this request was refused by the
Ministry of Finance with support from the War Damage Committee, which in a
statement of 12 September 1945 wrote:
"... the difference between the value of the assets that were
originally confiscated from each person and the amount that is now
restored to him is a loss that should be dealt with in the same way as
corresponding war damage. Were the State in this case ñ as the
Reparations Office has requested the Ministry of Finance ñ to grant
an amount of approximately 1.5 million kroner to facilitate the repayment,
the owners would probably be better compensated than other claimants of
war damage compensation. The committee will therefore not recommend that a
grant be made by the Treasury. The owners should be instructed to claim
damages in the normal way."
In addition, on the instructions of the Ministry of Finance, half of the
administrative costs of the Reparations Office were taken from the common
fund of seized assets.
The regulations for the settlement of estates after the war that were
enforced by the Office for War Damage to Moveable Property were based on
two main principles: reconstruction and an even social distribution.
Insurance principles were to a large extent ignored and instead account
was taken of the victim's economic position and needs, the extent of the
damage and what had been damaged. Moveable property used for professional
purposes was as a rule compensated for according to the valuation, whereas
the loss of personal moveable property was compensated for according to a
sliding scale. The principle of even social distribution meant that the
greater the loss the smaller the percentage of compensation. Compensation
was also calculated for households as a whole, which sometimes led to
substantial discrepancies for households with extensive property and
correspondingly large losses. These principles affected the Jews
particularly seriously because of the extent of the liquidation. Because
the Jewish community, with its institutions and religious centres, had
suffered total economic liquidation, it received as a whole considerably
reduced compensation in relation to its actual losses. The principle of
reconstruction also led to reduced compensation in cases where the
authorities regarded the compensation as having no importance for
reconstruction.
In short, these rules meant that the Jews as a group were more seriously
affected than others, since this group consisted of people of all ages, in
contrast to that of other Norwegians, which was dominated by young men.
What characterized the Jewish group after the war was that so many of
its members had been killed. Thus they were in a different situation,
especially emotionally, from other Norwegian refugees who returned home
after fleeing the country because of their resistance to the Nazi regime.
The leaders and heads of families in the Jewish group had in many cases
been killed, which weakened the ability of these families to safeguard
their interests. In some cases whole families had been wiped out, and
because of the close family ties within the group, all of the survivors
had lost relations, either close or distant.
In section 16, subsection 5, Provisional Act No. 3 of 25 April 1947
relating to war damage to moveable property laid down a general provision
that the amount of compensation could be reduced or in the case of partial
damage completely rejected "when this is found to be reasonable with
regard to the claimantís financial status and needs ". This
had direct economic consequences in cases where many members of a family
had been killed. Reduced compensation was paid because, as it was put, the
heirs could otherwise have profited from the war, since under normal
circumstances they would not have inherited from so many people at once.
In addition the payments were regulated by establishing an order of
inheritance. On account of the differentiated inheritance tax, which was
lower for direct heirs than for more distant relatives, the percentage
paid out varied according to whether the heir was direct or indirect. The
order of inheritance was established on the basis of assumptions of who
had died first in a family that entered the gas chamber together. There
are examples in the available evidence where the result of this supposed
order of inheritance was very unfavourable for the survivors, cf. NOU
1997: 22, pages 100-102 and pages 110-111.
Since death certificates were not issued in Auschwitz, those who died
there were classified as missing persons, not as dead. The survivors were
not given assets from their estates since the assets were transferred to
the public guardian's office. This applied to half of the group of
survivors. From the public guardian's office the assets were transferred
to the probate and bankruptcy court to be dealt with there. This process
took many years, during which new orders of inheritance were also
established. During the administration of estate proceedings, amounts
charged to the estates included mortgage debt, taxes and inheritance tax.
It is probable that such deductions in connection with public and private
administration of estates were almost equivalent to the total payments to
the Jewish group from the reparations agencies, cf. NOU 1997: 22, pages
110-111. It was also difficult for the survivors to find out what their
rights were, partly because no separate office was set up for Jewish
matters, in contrast to the situation for other groups with a common fate,
cf. NOU 1997: 22, page 88.
In the spring of 1995 new information about the Jewish property seized
by the Quisling regime was published in the media, and the Norwegian
Government decided to have the facts clarified as far as possible. Thus in
March 1996 a committee was appointed to survey and evaluate the facts of
the case. The Government stressed that it wished to have all the facts so
as to be able to evaluate suitable follow-up measures.
3 NOU 1997: 22 Confiscation of Jewish Assets in Norway during World War
II
The committee to investigate what happened to the property of Jews in
Norway during World War II was appointed on 29 March 1996 by the Norwegian
Ministry of Justice. The committee had the following composition:
- County Governor Oluf Skarpnes (Chairman)
- Professor of Law Thor Falkanger, University of Oslo
- Professor of History Ole Kristian Grimnes, University of Oslo
- Judge Guri Sunde, Nedre Telemark District Court
- Assistant Director Anne Hals, National Archives
- Psychologist Berit Reisel, Oslo
- Historian Bjarte Bruland, Bergen
Berit Reisel and Bjarte Bruland were appointed to the committee on the
recommendation of the Jewish community. Anne Hals asked to be excused from
duty as a member of the committee and, on 11 June 1996, the Ministry
approved her replacement by Miss Eli Fure of the National Archives.
Executive Officer Torfinn Vollan from the office of the County Governor of
Vest-Agder was the committee’s secretary.
The committee received the following terms of reference:
"1. The committee is entrusted with the task of surveying what
happened to Jewish property in Norway during World War II. The report of
the survey shall inter alia provide a description of:
- the laws and regulations of the Quisling regime concerning the
confiscation of Jewish property
- the way in which the confiscation was carried out, and the names of
the agencies involved
- the extent of the confiscations, including:
- the number of persons and enterprises whose property was confiscated
- the type of property that was confiscated and its estimated value
- how and by whom confiscated property was handled (sold, transferred,
etc.)
- the actual and legal difference between the confiscation of Jewish
property in Norway and the confiscation by the Quisling regime of
property belonging to other Norwegians.
9. The committee shall survey how and to what extent confiscated
property was returned to the Jews after the war. This survey shall include
a description of:
- laws and regulations that applied to the restitution
- how the restitution was organized
- measures that were taken to ensure that the property was returned
- property that was returned and the value of this property
- what happened to the property of Jewish families that were
annihilated during the war and, where possible, a summary of the total
value of the confiscated property of these Jewish families.
15. The committee may also examine other issues relevant to the case.
16. The committee will decide how the work shall be carried out, and may
engage people to undertake the necessary investigations. The committee may
also procure statements from persons or organizations who wish to supply
information to the committee when such information is deemed to be of
interest or importance to the work of the committee.
17. The working period of the committee is estimated at one year, but
this may if necessary be adjusted when the committee has assessed the
amount of work involved.
18. The committee will report to the Ministry of Justice."
The committee submitted its report to the Minister of Justice on 23 June
1997. The report is divided into two parts, a majority report and a
minority report. The majority consisted of the Chairman of the Committee,
County Governor Oluf Skarpnes, Professor Thor Falkanger, archivist Eli
Fure, Professor Ole Kristian Grimnes and District Recorder Guri Sunde. The
minority consisted of psychologist Berit Reisel and historian Bjarte
Bruland.
The report was published as NOU 1997: 22 Confiscation of Jewish Assets
in Norway during World War II.
4 The Government's fundamental views concerning the settlement
The Government has chosen to base its views on those of the minority of
the Skarpnes Committee.
The injustice done to the Jewish people can never be undone, but the
Government considers that the historical and moral debts with regard to
the economic liquidation of Jewish assets must be settled, and that this
settlement should also be expressed in economic terms.
The Government wishes to emphasize that the Nazis' attempts during the
war to eradicate the Jews as a people have played a central role in the
development of international rules concerning genocide. This genocide
aspect has placed the Jews in a unique position among the many victims of
the German occupation of Norway.
The settlement must primarily be based on a broad moral approach, which
must be given a form and a content that take account of the special nature
of the case. The Government has proceeded on the assumption that the
settlement should be limited to economic considerations.
The collective settlement must emphasize that compensation is being made
to the Jewish community in Norway as a whole, especially because the
economic and physical liquidation was directed at the Jews in Norway as a
group. In addition there is the fact that many of the Jews who were killed
did not leave surviving family members. In this context it is natural to
have an economic settlement in the form of an allocation for common Jewish
purposes at both national and international levels. At the same time, by
offering payments ex gratia, the Government wishes to support the
individuals who were adversely affected by the persecutions in Norway
during World War II.
The Government is also preparing to set up a monument at Vippetangen in
Oslo in memory of the Norwegian Jews who were deported to Germany during
the war.
5 Economic implementation
5.1 Collective compensation
Collective compensation will emphasize that a debt is being settled in
relation to the Jewish community because the economic and physical
liquidation was directed at the Jewish community in Norway as a whole. Not
only was privately owned Jewish property confiscated, but Jewish
institutions and religious centres in Norway were economically liquidated.
In its evaluation of the total sum to be allocated in the collective
compensation, the Government has taken account of the fact that some
Jewish families were totally eradicated and thus received no individual
compensation.
It is proposed that the collective compensation should amount to NOK 250
million, and it is proposed that the money should be divided as follows:
- An amount of NOK 150 million to the Jewish communities in Norway.
The money is to be spent on ensuring the preservation of Jewish culture
and the future of the Jewish community in Norway.
- An amount of NOK 60 million to support outside Norway's borders for
commemorating and developing the traditions and culture that the Nazis
tried to eradicate. The money is to be allocated through a fund to be
administered by a board with representatives appointed by the Storting,
the Government, the registered Jewish communities in Norway and the
World Jewish Congress/World Jewish Restitution Organization.
- An amount of NOK 40 million to be used to set up and run a resource
centre for studies of the Holocaust and religious minorities in Norway.
5.1.1 Ensuring the preservation of Jewish culture and the future of the
Jewish community in Norway
An amount of NOK 150 million is to be allocated to the Jewish
communities in Norway. The money is to be spent on ensuring the
preservation of Jewish culture and the future of the Jewish community in
Norway.
There are at present two Jewish congregations registered in Norway, one
in Oslo and one in Trondheim. All Jewish organizations and institutions in
Norway are represented through these two congregations and they also
safeguard the interests of Jews who are not registered as members. The
County Governor's offices in Oslo and Akershus and in Sør-Trøndelag
advise that these congregations have about 1 050 registered members as of
1 January 1998, 920 in Oslo and 127 in Trondheim. The Jewish community
estimates that there are almost 1 600 Jews living in Norway today.
In 1939 there were just over 2 000 Jews in Norway, almost all of whom
were registered as members of the congregations. Religious and cultural
life flourished, and there were several synagogues, children's and old
people's homes and a holiday home. After the war only 750 members
remained. Many of the leaders were no longer there and the institutions
had been abandoned. Everything had to be totally rebuilt. Of the three
synagogues, only one of the two in Oslo could be used. The other one was
not restored, and the synagogue in Trondheim had to be reconstructed. In
1960 a Jewish community centre was built in Oslo, with economic help from
Jewish organizations abroad. According to the Jewish community they have
been dependent on economic support from Jewish institutions abroad to keep
up their cultural and religious activity. The membership and level of
activity began to rise again at the beginning of the 1980s.
The Jewish community is one of the oldest minorities in the country and
is well integrated into Norwegian society. In the light of this and of the
tragic history of the war there is a great need for information from this
minority group. Such information will make a substantial contribution to
greater pluralism and tolerance.
In order to ensure the future of the Jewish minority in Norway, the
community needs funds for premises, equipment and above all qualified
leaders and other workers in the fields of religion, culture, teaching,
information, social work and administration.
An estimated NOK 50 million of the NOK 150 million is intended to be
used for repayment of debts and investment such as the rehabilitation of
buildings and property, including the purchase of a graveyard and day-care
facilities and the establishment of a Jewish museum and library. The
income from the remaining NOK 100 million is intended to be used for the
operation and development of organizations and institutions that will
ensure the future of the Jewish community in Norway.
It is proposed that a fund be set up consisting of the collective
allocation to the Jewish communities in Norway. The fund will be
administered by a board consisting of three representatives of the Jewish
community in Oslo and two from the Jewish community in Trondheim. The
members are to be appointed by the boards of the two communities, and they
will also be responsible for drawing up guidelines for the board of the
fund. The transfer of money will be made when the board has been
appointed. It is proposed that the amount will be transferred to the
Jewish congregation in Oslo on behalf of the whole Jewish community in
Norway.
The Ministry of Justice is to receive an annual report on the use of the
funds, including accounts audited by a chartered accountant.
5.1.2 Support outside Norway's borders for commemorating and developing
the traditions and culture that the Nazis tried to eradicate
NOK 60 million is being given in support of Jewish institutions or
projects outside Norway. The funds (capital and any income) are to be
allotted to institutions or projects whose aim is to commemorate,
reconstruct or develop Jewish culture or traditions that the Nazis almost
succeeded in totally eradicating. The funds are preferably to be used for
teaching, research or information purposes. They may be either allotted to
existing institutions or to new institutions established for this purpose.
The institutions or projects must be politically neutral.
It is proposed that the money is placed in a fund with a board
consisting of one representative appointed by the Storting, one by the
Government, one by the Jewish communities in Norway and one by the World
Jewish Congress/World Jewish Restitution Organization, and Nobel Laureate
Eli Wiesel is proposed as chairman of the board. In cooperation with the
registered Jewish communities in Norway, the Ministry of Justice will lay
down the statutes and instructions for the work of the board in accordance
with the general guidelines that have been proposed. Any administrative
costs are to be covered by the allocation.
5.1.3 Establishment of a resource centre for studies of the Holocaust
and religious minorities in Norway
One of the most important lessons learned from World War II and the
Holocaust was how vulnerable minorities are to prejudice, hatred and
persecution, which taken to extremes led to the most systematic and
gruesome genocide in history. The best means of combating prejudice is
through unbiased information, which relies on knowledge of the minorities
in our society. Thus the sum of NOK 40 million is proposed for the
establishment and operation of a documentation and resource centre for
promoting expertise in Norway on the Holocaust in general and more
specifically on the Norwegian chapter of the history of the Holocaust.
A resource centre for the religious minorities in Norway is proposed as
part of this centre. It should create a foundation for broad knowledge in
Norwegian society on the minorities' history, philosophy of life,
traditions, culture and position in Norwegian society. It should develop
educational material in these areas, support research on the different
minorities and minority issues in general, and serve as a place to hold
meetings, seminars and dialogues between the minorities and between the
minorities and other groups in Norwegian society. The resource centre is
to be politically and ideologically neutral.
The intention is to establish the centre in cooperation with one of the
universities in Norway. The issue has been raised with the Ministry of
Education, Research and Church Affairs and the University of Oslo. It has
been proposed that the ministry should establish links with one of the
faculties or departments of the University of Oslo. The issue must,
however, also be dealt with in the usual way by the appropriate bodies of
the university.
A separate board is proposed for the centre, and the academic freedom of
the institution must be ensured. The members of the board must include
people with inter-disciplinary expertise. The Holocaust part of the centre
will be set up after a dialogue with the Jewish communities in Norway and
other Jewish expertise, for example from Yad Vashem in Jerusalem, and the
centre for religious minorities will be set up in collaboration with the
relevant minority groups. This will ensure that these groups have an
influence on the profile and work of the centre. The Ministry of
Education, Research and Church Affairs will set up the centre. The
budgetary responsibility will be transferred to the Ministry by agreement.
5.2 Individual compensation
The Government proposes a compensation in the form of a standard amount
of NOK 200 000 to those persons in Norway who suffered from the
anti-Jewish measures, for example who had their property and assets
confiscated by the occupation authorities during the war. Many of these
are now dead, and spouses and direct heirs will take their place and
inherit according to the provisions concerning distribution laid down in
the Inheritance Act.
It is difficult to estimate the total cost of the individual
compensation, since the amount will vary according to the number of
applicants. The amount is expected to be in the region of NOK 100 to 200
million in addition to the collective compensation. If the individual
payments should amount to substantially less than NOK 200 million, the
Government will consider increasing the collective compensation. The
Government will decide on how this should be used in collaboration with
the Jewish communities in Norway.
It is important for the dignified conduct of the moral settlement that
there are clear rules as to who is entitled to payments and how they
should be made. It is important to avoid harrowing processes being
triggered by the settlement.
5.2.1 Who are entitled to payments?
Payments will be made on application to those persons in Norway who
suffered from the anti-Jewish measures, for example by having property and
assets confiscated by the occupation authorities during World War II.
There is no definite information as to who would be included in the
individual settlement but, in connection with the work of the Skarpnes
Committee, the minority of the committee drew up a list of the Jews who
were deported or fled from Norway between 1941 and 1942. The list contains
2 173 names and is expected to be useful in finding the people who may be
entitled to the settlement.
Payments will be made subject to the following conditions:
- A payment will be given to persons who were born before the end of
1942 and who suffered in Norway from the anti-Jewish measures, for
example who had their property and assets confiscated by the occupation
authorities during World War II. The payment will amount to a standard
sum of NOK 200 000.
- If the person concerned is no longer alive, the money will be paid
to the heirs according to the provisions concerning distribution laid
down in the Inheritance Act, but limited to spouses and direct heirs.
- The payment to each individual is limited to NOK 200 000.
One of the conditions is that the persecution must have taken place in
Norway. This affiliation criterion is intended to emphasize that the
settlement is primarily aimed at Jews living in Norway before and during
the war. In addition to Norwegian nationals, this includes foreign
nationals and stateless Jews. Jewish refugees from other countries are
eligible if they were temporarily staying in Norway during the war and
suffered from anti-Jewish measures in this country.
Thus compensation will be made to all Jewish families and individuals
who either had their property confiscated or were subject to confiscation
orders and Jewish families and individuals who did not own assets that
could be seized and who therefore had no economic losses after the
liquidation, but who suffered in other ways from the persecution or who
lost their lives, for example in concentration camps or prison.
The standard payment is set at NOK 200 000. If the person entitled to
the payment has died, the sum is distributed between the bereaved in
accordance with the distribution provisions in the Inheritance Act, except
that only the surviving spouse and direct heirs are entitled to it. The
rule concerning the minimum amount for a spouse (section 6 of the
Inheritance Act) does not apply, and a surviving spouse may not retain an
undistributed estate with regard to the payment.
There is also a maximum limit of NOK 200 000 per person, so that no one
may receive more than this amount. Thus a person who is himself entitled
to a payment may not receive payments on behalf of deceased parents,
grandparents or spouse, even if he were entitled to it. Nor will his heirs
be entitled to it even if the payments they receive are less than the
maximum amount. If the payment is reduced because of the maximum amount,
other heirs will not be entitled to the surplus.
For example, if both a person's parents were entitled to a payment and
both are dead, the direct heirs will receive NOK 400 000 to be distributed
among them. If both sets of grandparents and the parents were entitled to
a payment and are now dead, the direct heirs will still not receive more
than NOK 400 000.
5.2.2 Procedure for applying for compensation
The Ministry of Justice aims to announce the arrangement in the
Norwegian and international press. A time limit of six months is proposed.
Applications must be received by the Ministry of Justice by this deadline,
so that the matter can be dealt with within a reasonable time.
In collaboration with the Jewish communities in Norway, the ministry
will inform all those members of the communities for whom this is
relevant. The ministry assumes that the Jewish communities in Norway will
inform their sister organizations in Sweden and other relevant countries.
The World Jewish Congress/World Jewish Restitution Organization will also
be informed.
5.2.3 Documentation requirements
The application should include name (and any previous names), address,
date of birth, period of stay in Norway and address during the stay in
Norway.
Applications on behalf of deceased persons should contain an explanation
of the relationship with the deceased and this should as far as possible
be documented. The existence of any other heirs should also be indicated.
However, the special nature of the case means that documentation may be
difficult to obtain, for example there may be a lack of written documents
and information may be unreliable. This must be taken into consideration
when the cases are being dealt with and when decisions must be based on
information that cannot be documented. It is further assumed that the
Jewish communities in Norway on request will assist with the clarification
of questions of identity in this work. The Skarpnes Committee went through
the material in the National Archives and a new review is not planned.
5.2.4 Procedures for dealing with applications and appeals
It is proposed that the Ministry of Justice should process and decide on
applications in the first instance. The Public Administration Act applies
to the procedures followed by the Ministry, and decisions on the
applications are to be regarded as individual decisions, cf. section 2 of
the Act. Because of the special nature of this settlement, the ministry
considers it advisable that appeals should be handled by a separate board.
The ministry therefore proposes that regulations are laid down determining
that the members of the Storting's ex gratia compensation committee should
serve as a separate appeals board for the ministry's decisions on
payments. It is proposed that the procedures for dealing with appeals
should follow the same guidelines as those governing ex gratia
compensation payments, according to which the ministry prepares the
appeals and acts as secretariat for the committee. It is proposed that it
should not be possible to appeal to the Storting against the decision of
the committee. The Ministry considers that in this way an appropriate
appeals system will be established that will maintain legal safeguards in
appeals procedures. One does not expect a large number of appeals.
6 Economic and administrative consequences
NOK 250 million is being set aside for collective settlement. The
Ministry of Justice has the task of providing assistance in the transfer
and use of the funds in collaboration with the Jewish communities in
Norway. The Ministry of Education, Research and Church Affairs will set up
the centre for the study of the Holocaust and of religious minorities in
Norway.
With reference to the calculations mentioned under subsection 5.2.1,
about 2 200 Jews are in principle entitled to individual compensation.
Many of these are now deceased, and it is assumed that spouses and direct
heirs will receive compensation in their place. A total of 767 Jews,
including whole families, were deported and killed. Many of these did not
leave spouses or children and since other heirs are not included there
will not be anyone entitled to seek compensation on behalf of the
deceased. Given that payment is to be made only following application,
there may be some individuals who, for some reason, will not apply. Hence
it is very difficult to predict the number of applications. The ministry
estimates, however, that payments will be made to or on behalf of 500 to 1
000 of the original 2 200 Jews. Thus the individual compensation will
amount to NOK 100 to 200 million. If the individual payments amount to
substantially less than NOK 200 million, the Government will consider
increasing the amount of the collective settlement. The recipients of the
individual compensation payment will not be liable to income or
inheritance tax on the amount.
The costs of publicizing individual compensation and the necessary legal
advice in connection with the establishment of the fund, etc. are
estimated to amount to NOK 1 250 000.
It is proposed that the applications for the individual compensations
are dealt with in the first instance by the Ministry of Justice, which
will need three executive officer years in addition to the necessary
secretarial assistance. Expenses will also be incurred in connection with
the handling of appeals and other administrative functions. The Ministry
of Education, Research and Church Affairs will encounter expenses in
connection with the establishment of the Centre for the study of the
Holocaust and the religious minorities in Norway. These expenses are
estimated to amount to a total of NOK 3 250 000.
The ministry estimates that the establishment and administration of the
scheme and its publication will amount to NOK 4.5 million, and that up to
NOK 3 million of this, including part of the expenses for the three
executive officer years in the Ministry of Justice, will be incurred in
1998.
With regard to the budgetary aspects of the settlement, it is proposed
that a new chapter should be included in the budget, numbered 476 and
entitled "The historical and moral settlement for the treatment in
Norway of the economic liquidation of the Jewish minority during the
Second World War." Four items are proposed under this chapter, i.e.
01, "Operational costs", 70, " Ensuring the preservation of
Jewish culture and the future of the Jewish community in Norway", 71,
" Support outside Norway's borders for commemorating and developing
the traditions and culture that the Nazis tried to eradicate", and
72, "Ex gratia payments". The operational costs under item 01
will be transferable, since it is not certain when they will be incurred.
It is expected that the funds under items 70, "Ensuring the
preservation of Jewish culture and the future of the Jewish community in
Norway", and 71,
" Support outside Norway's borders for commemorating and developing
the traditions and culture that the Nazis tried to eradicate", will
be paid out in their entirety in 1998, while the allocations for the
centre for the study of the Holocaust and the religious minorities in
Norway will for practical reasons not be paid out until after 1998. Some
administrative costs will be incurred in connection with the preparations
for the centre, and in 1998 these will be covered as operational costs by
item 01. It is proposed that item 72 be allocated on the basis of an
estimate, since the final amount will depend on the number of payments
made. The payments under this item will have to be divided between 1998
and 1999. These payments are expected to be made at the earliest in late
autumn of 1998, and the estimated amount for 1998 is NOK 10 million. The
ministry proposes that the Storting gives an authorization to pay the
individual compensations. Reference is also made to the discussion of this
topic in Proposition No. 65 (1997-98) to the Storting.
With respect to the allocations for 1999, the ministry will take these
up with the Storting in connection with the ordinary work on the budget.
The Ministry of Justice and the Police
hereby recommends:
that Your Majesty approves and signs the submitted proposal for a White
Paper to the Storting on historical and moral settlement for the treatment
in Norway of the economic liquidation of the Jewish minority during the
Second World War.
We Harald, King of Norway,
hereby confirm:
that the Storting is requested to make a decision on the historical and
moral settlement for the treatment in Norway of the economic liquidation
of the Jewish minority during the Second World War in accordance with the
submitted proposal.
The recommendation by the Ministry of Justice and the Police is
enclosed.
Proposal
for the decision on changes in the budget term for 1998
I
Expenses
