34 No. 69 JUSTICE Alan Hevesy of New York State, the threat of a class A action, and harming the reputation of German industry in the U.S., compelled companies to negotiate with world Jewish organizations and survivor organizations to reach an agreement about compensation. For industry, legal peace was crucial and therefore, together with the Federal German government, it created a German Federal law known as the Fund of Remembrance, which allocated over five billion euros to offset outstanding claims. The fund created a framework to address individual claims by slave laborers exploited by German industry during the Holocaust. The program was to be administered by the Jewish Claims Conference. The Federal German legislation that was introduced following the negotiations created the so-called Slave Labor Fund, which included criteria for the allocations of funds for compensating those individuals. The law that was introduced elevated this compensation agreement to the normative level of a Federal law (as opposed to administrative regulation of government). This ensured that the compensation is also recognized as a moral step of the Federal government and German industry. The remainder of the fund – the so-called Future Pillar created in 2007 – was of great importance, as the personal compensation program then ended. The proceeds of the remaining capital of the fund were to be used to finance projects in the fields of education and remembrance.21 Ghetto Pension Law – Social Security Law Returns In 1997, the German Federal Supreme Court acknowledged that in some cases, an employment relationship, as defined under the General Federal Social Security Law, could be recognized and a ghetto working industry could be identified. The specific case was forced labor in the Lodz ghetto. However, a technical problem remained unsolved: a deadline that appeared in the existing combination of the RVO and FRG did not enable survivors to file cases or allow them to obtain old age pensions that they might have received as a result of their forced labor in ghettos. In June 2002, the German Bundestag adopted the ZRBG – Gesetz zur Zahlbarmachung von Renten aus Beschäftigungen in einem Ghetto (the law enabling payments of pensions created due to employment in ghettos). Like other German Federal compensation laws, it did not provide an appropriate legal definition of a ghetto. This created confusion regarding the definition of various concepts, such as what is a ghetto, the definition of work out of free will, and remuneration [the last two classical demands of Federal Social law]. This subsequently sparked great frustration on the part of Holocaust survivors as the rejection rate of claim, for various reasons, was nearly 95%.22 The Federal Social Court denied, therefore, most of these claims between 2003 and 2004, reasoning that remuneration must be a financially viable benefit. Thus, the Federal Social Court shared the legal interpretation of the social security institutions, maintaining that for a social benefit, core elements of the law, also named in Art. I to ZRBG, must be fulfilled. The Federal court also accepted the position of the authorities about the lack of “free will” regarding ghetto work, whereas many Holocaust survivors were compensated by the aforementioned Slave Labor Fund, and thus could not be eligible for social payment based on freely assumed work in ghettos. Survivors continued to fight against the authorities, and in June 2009, following a series of Federal Social Court decisions, monumental changes took place to enable Holocaust survivors to make use of this legislation, finally recognizing the tragic conditions under which the Holocaust survivors were living in ghettos (incarcerated without basic freedoms).23 Like in the 1950s, litigation revolved again around the territorial scope of the legislation, and the debate remained: which ghetto locations were to be included. At the same time, due to other international treaties signed by Germany, such as the German-Israeli Social Security Treaty, survivors were once again split into two groups: those who would receive high monthly pensions, and those who would receive pensions and retroactive payments starting in July 1997. In 2014, the German Bundestag approved the ZRBG AndrG – ZRBG Änderungsgesetz amendment, thus enabling applicants to receive retroactive payments as of July 1997. The law also covered the territories of Bulgaria and Romania. A lengthy examination began, once again, to determine which ghettos in Bulgaria and Romania were to be regarded as such under this legislation. This process 21. Foundation EVZ, available at https://www.stiftung-evz. de/ 22. Jürgen Zarusky, “History on Trial before the Social Welfare Courts: Holocaust Survivors, German Judges, and the Struggle for Ghetto Pensions,” AUTHENTICITY AND VICTIMHOOD AFTER THE SECOND WORLD WAR (University of Toronto Press, 2021), available at https://www.degruyter. com/document/doi/10.3138/9781487528225-006/pdf 23. Kirstin Platt, K. (Jan. 1, 2012), BEZWEIFELTE ERINNERUNG, VERWEIGERTE GLAUBHAFTIGKEIT. Leiden, The Netherlands: Brill Fink. doi: https://doi.org/10.30965/9783846753736
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjgzNzA=