Molotovo-Ribentropo pakto teisiniai padariniai Baltijos valstybėms: apie pareigą "įveikti paveldėtas iš praeities problemas"

LTStraipsnyje analizuojami Baltijos šalių nepriklausomybės atkūrimo teisiniai klausimai, susiję su 1939 metų Molotovo-Ribentropo pakto padarinių likvidavimu. Autoriaus nuomone, ne visi šio pakto padariniai Lietuvai, Latvija ir Estijai buvo panaikinti. Tai iliustruojama Baltijos valstybių tęstinumo, taip pat joms padarytos žalos atlyginimo problemų sprendimo pavyzdžiais. Pagrindinė straipsnio išvada yra ta, kad tarptautinė bendrija nėra labai suinteresuota spręsti šių iš praeities paveldėtų problemų, palikdama jas pačioms Molotovo-Ribentropo pakto aukoms. [Iš leidinio]Reikšminiai žodžiai: Molotovo-Ribentropo paktas; Nepriklausomybės atkūrimas; Baltijos valstybės; Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact; Restoration of the independence; Baltic states.

ENThe Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact of 1939 which assigned the Baltic republics to the Soviet "sphere of interests" had a fateful impact on the Baltic states. The consequences have not been overcome to this day. This is apparent in two problem areas: state continuity, on the one hand, and restitution and compensation, on the other. The claims on state continuity are based on the fact that the three states were illegally incorporated into the Soviet Union in 1940. Parts of the population offered resistance in various forms while the Baltic legations abroad continued as state organs in those Western countries which upheld their accreditation. In these respects the Baltic republics continued their legal existence. Haifa century later Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania declared the acts of joining the USSR in 1940 to be null and void ex tunc. However, not all states recognize the Baltic claims to state continuity. Some international organizations are careful not to be explicit on the issue. Legal writings reveal a wide range of opinions. The USSR and now the Russian Federation insist that the Baltic states have lost their international personality on the day when they were incorporated into the Union in 1940. It is based on the argument that a "threat of force" was not prohibited under international law at that time. Consequently, the three Baltic republics allegedly are "new" states which "seceeded" from the USSR in 1991. The view that a threat of force was permitted under international law in 1940 is not convincing - the opposite view can be substantiated in the article. Moreover, treaty law explicitly prohibits "any violent measures". The Baltic claims to continuity mean a full restoration of sovereignty. In practice, however, the exercize of such right has met with obstacles. This is evident in such areas as choice of a security system. Wrongful acts entail responsibility and the obligation to provide compensation.In the Baltic case the wrong-doer states are German Reich and the USSR, but neither of them exists any more. The successor (or continuator) states are the Federal Republic of Germany and the Russian Federation. In 1989 both state declared the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact to be null and void ab initio. The losses of the Baltic states include, among others, archives evacuated to the USSR and damages. Russia considers monetary claims to be unfounded, but Germany has provided some relief to Baltic victims of Nazi persecution. Applications are handled by "partner organizations" of a German fund administering 10 billion DM. The competent agencies for victims from the Baltic states are located in Minsk and Moscow, respectively. It suggests that the victims have been citizens of the USSR at the time of persecution. Such view would deny the Baltic claim to continuity. No agreement has been concluded relating to the consequences of the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact for the Baltic countries. The closest we come is the "Pact on Stability in Europe", adopted in Paris in 1995. The basic idea of the act is that candidate states, prior to becoming members of the European Union, must "overcome the problems inherited from the past". This is smart diplomatic language and means, in plain text, "problems inherited from the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact". Thus, the violation of sovereignty has not found redress. On the contrary, the Stability Pact of 1995 freezes the consequences of the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact. The burden has been shifted to the victims. [From the publication]

• Teisė / Law
• Istorija / History