 |
| the experience upon which the Hague Convention is based, and which,
nevertheless, owing to the wars of the past century is only aware of the
“military requirements.” It was only due to the economic war that the
industrial enterprises of the belligerent states were drawn into the war solely
because of the economic war and consequently involved in the "military
requirements," to which the Hague Convention refers. In this connection,
consideration must be given to the fact that the economic war originated from
the blockade of Germany, which was carried on in World War I by the Allies, the
fact must also be considered that for the first time in the year 1916, private
property was expropriated during the war, namely, by the Allies. I would like
to quote the English legal expert Sir Thomas Barclay, who wrote in [Fortnightly
Review] October 1922 the following (Eberhardt 809, Def. Ex.
2918): |
| |
“Already in January 1916,
the British Government was the first to be guilty of liquidating certain enemy
interests * * *. The result of this was that in the majority of cases, private
property was expropriated without indemnification, and in others in lieu of
merely a nominal indemnification. Our own government, the first to be guilty of
this crime, must now therefore be the first to face the task arising from this
fact.
“Actually it seems as if we have reverted to prehistoric
conditions, to the communism of primitive tribes, and at any rate returned to
that kind of brigandage by the state, which, in spite of the efforts of a
Grotius to introduce a certain moral standard with regard to the relations
among nations, has continued into our
times.” |
| |
| In the light of these facts I still wish to refer to another which
has always caused the prosecution to submit a form of reasoning which is
without legal basis. In the indictment the prosecution refers to Articles 45 56
of the Hague Convention with regard to spoliation. Here, as in the other
economic trials, they intentionally forget Article 43. It is just this
article which is of particular significance. It reads as
follows:* |
| |
“The authority of the
legitimate power having in fact passed into the hands of the occupant, the
latter shall take all the measures in his power to restore, and ensure, as far
as possible, public order and safety, while respecting, unless absolutely
prevented, the laws in force in the
country.” |
| |
| However, public order and life in an occupied territory may only be
rehabilitated or maintained if the economy of the country |
__________
* Ibid., Article 43, 31.
202 |
. 
