crimes committed by totalitarian regimes - Ministrstvo za pravosodje

Crimes committed by totalitarian regimes
principles legitimised the ‘elimination’ of people who were considered harmful to the construction of a
new society and, as such, enemies of the totalitarian Communist regimes”. This implies acknowledgment
at the European level of crimes of genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes committed by
communist totalitarian regimes on various grounds, including racial, ethnic or religious hatred, political
convictions or social status.
The Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe has also stressed the need for moral
assessment and condemnation of crimes committed by Communist totalitarian regimes, and called for
a clear position of the international community on the tragic past. Thus, the first argument why we need
an additional legal instrument dealing with the crimes committed by Communist totalitarian regimes
is the need for the same moral and legal assessment and condemnation of the Communist crimes as
those of the Nazi regime. If at the European level we agree to persecute those who publicly condone,
deny or grossly trivialize the Nazi crimes then, acting consistently and in line with the approach of the
Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe, we should set the same standard of treatment of those
who publicly condone, deny or grossly trivialize the Communist crimes. I would like to stress here that
I am calling for equal condemnation of crimes and equal persecution of those who try to justify them,
rather than for condemnation of activities of all communist parties, including those democratically
participating in the political life of many EU Member States and not involved in commission of crimes
of totalitarian regimes. I think we should concentrate our attention only on the crimes committed by
Communist totalitarian regimes rather than on dealing with the broader issue of communism because
crimes of genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes deserve condemnation and persecution,
notwithstanding who are their perpetrators or what kind of ideology lies behind these crimes.
In addition, I would like to point out that from a legal point of view, the Communist totalitarian
regimes in the Baltic States had been imposed from outside by the foreign State (the USSR) that had
occupied their territory committing aggression. Therefore, contrary to some other European States,
this regime in the Baltic States had not been internal; it was rather an alien occupation regime. I do not
think either that the fact of the 1940 Soviet aggression against the Baltic States and their subsequent
occupation can be doubted. I can recall the consistent policy of non-recognition of the illegal annexation
of the Baltic States which had been pursued by the majority of democratic States, including current
EU Members. That policy was reflected inter alia in the 13 January 1983 Resolution of the European
Parliament which expressly condemned the occupation of the Baltic States committed pursuant to the
Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact; it was also noted in this Resolution that “the Soviet annexation of the three
Baltic States has still not been formally recognised by most European States and the USA, Canada, the
United Kingdom, Australia and the Vatican still adhere to the concept of the Baltic States”. Similarly, in
the 29 September 1960 Resolution No. 189(1960) on the Situation in the Baltic States on the Twentieth
Anniversary of their Forcible Incorporation into the Soviet Union, the Parliamentary Assembly of the
Council of Europe noted that “this illegal annexation (of the Baltic States) took place without any
genuine reference to the wishes of the people” and that “the independent existence of the Baltic States
is still recognised de jure by a great majority of the Governments of the nations of the free world”. In
the 28 January 1987 Resolution No. 872(1987) on the Situation of the Baltic Peoples, the Parliamentary
Assembly of the Council of Europe reiterated its position that “the incorporation of the three Baltic
States into the Soviet Union was and still is a flagrant violation of the right to self-determination of
peoples, and that it remains unrecognised by the great majority of European States and many members
of the international community”. Moreover, the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human
Rights, in its 16 March 2006 Judgment in the Ždanoka v. Latvia case, expressly noted that the Baltic
States lost their independence “in 1940 in the aftermath of the partition of the Central and Eastern
Europe agreed by Hitler’s Germany and Stalin’s Soviet Union by way of the secret protocol to the
Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact, an agreement contrary to the generally recognised principles of international
law”. In the same Judgment, the European Court of Human Rights also stressed that in June 1940
“the Soviet army invaded” the Baltic States and the ensuing annexation of these states by the Soviet
Union was orchestrated and conducted under the authority of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union
(the CPSU), the local communist parties being satellite branches of the CPSU. The Court followed
the same reasoning and statement of facts in the 19 February 2008 judgment in the case of Kuolelis,
Bartoševičius and Burokevičius v. Lithuania: “Following an ultimatum to allow an unlimited number of
Soviet troops to be stationed in the Baltic countries, on 15 June 1940 the Soviet army invaded Lithuania.
The Government of Lithuania was removed from office, and a new government was formed under
82