Opposition parties call for reprivatization referendum
The government's bid to introduce comprehensive property restitution legislation hit a snag last week when opposition parties called for a national referendum on the controversial issue.
A week after President Aleksander Kwasniewski's reelection, leaders of the Democratic Left Alliance (SLD), the Peasants Party (PSL) and the Labor Union (UP) joined forces and introduced a plan where Poles would have a direct say in shaping a national reprivatization law through public ballot.
"The (government's) draft law does not meet our expectations," said Wieslaw Kaczmarek, an SLD deputy from Warsaw who sits on the Sejm's extraordinary commission on reprivatization. "In such a situation we are reaching for a weapon of last resort and that weapon (will) force a change in the government's position through a referendum."
The move by the opposition parties comes at a particularly crucial time for the minority Solidarity Election Action (AWS) government. Not only is AWS in the throes of a leadership crisis following the poor showing of its candidate, party head Marian Krzaklewski, in the presidential elections two weeks ago, but its comprehensive reprivatization law, which has been in the works for more than a year, is slated for a vote in Parliament early next month.
The move was widely criticized by politicians, reprivatization activists and researchers alike.
"We think that a referendum can't be held on whether or not to return stolen property," said Miroslaw Szypowski, chairman of the National Coalition of Revindication Organizations (OPOR). According to Szypowski, OPOR is an umbrella organization that represents 250,000 former property owners. "The referendum idea is just senseless."
Other observers charged that the referendum would mean a step backward in drawing to a close the delicate issue of how to compensate Poles and others who lost property during World War II and under communism.
According to Pawel Szalamacha, a scholar at the Adam Smith Research Centre, the tripartite bid is more about political posturing than it is about solving the controversial property restitution issue.
"SLD wants to add to its growing wave of support by constantly coming out with new initiatives and policies that will attract the attention of the electorate," he said. "The referendum will mean that once again there will be a ferocious, emotional debate on this subject."
Unlike many other Central European countries, Poland has failed to pass a law on property restitution. The lack of progress on the issue has stalled real estate development, worried buyers and frustrated owners looking to reclaim lost property.
The opposition parties' move also came at a sensitive moment in the government's legal fight over restitution claims in a U.S. court. Last week, Polish government lawyers filed a renewed motion to have a class action lawsuit dismissed from a New York federal court, claiming that a U.S. court does not have jurisdiction in the matter.
The restitution issue gained momentum last year when 11 Jews filed a class action lawsuit in U.S. courts against the Polish government seeking the return of property. Not only did the case, filed in New York on June 18, 1999, place the problem on the international agenda, it also spurred the government and Parliament to speed up work on draft legislation.
In a similar case earlier last year, a Chicago judge ruled that the Polish government is protected by sovereign immunity and cannot be sued in a foreign court. However, the lack of a restitution law could mean that a federal judge in New York might ultimately decide to grant jurisdiction.
"Because of the growing negative publicity coming out of the United States and Europe, any prolongation of the problem of reprivatization is a bad idea," Szalamacha said. "This reprivatization issue needs to be closed as quickly and as efficiently as possible."
Whatever its final form, reprivatization will undoubtedly be a source of controversy. Under the current draft bill, only individuals who were Polish citizens as of the end of last year will have a chance to get their property back or be compensated by the government. In addition, when possible, former owners will get their property back in-kind, according to the bill. If the property has already been sold or is in private hands, former owners will receive coupons worth up to 50% of the estimated value of their assets. Those coupons can then be sold outright to third parties or redeemed in the purchase of land or real estate owned by the state treasury.
In the case of property owners living in Poland, the treasury has estimated the value of property seized to be roughly zl. 95 billion ($21.1 billion). Freedom Union (UW) deputies contend that the government will end up forking out about zl. 200 million ($44.4 million) in administrative costs alone. Others charge that once the sticky process of returning property begins, the cost could be significantly higher.
"The only thing that will change hands is real estate, not real currency," said Jan Wyrowinski, a UW deputy from Torun who sits on the Sejm's extraordinary commission on reprivatization.
Opposition leaders charge that the bill in its present form could drain as much as zl. 44 billion ($9.7 billion) from the national budget, something the country can't afford. "We are not opposed to reprivatization, but we think that (the form of) restitution proposed in the bill cannot be supported by the national budget," Kaczmarek said.
If SLD, PSL and UP have their way, reprivatization would be limited to property taken under the communist system between 1944-1962 and would not include property now used by government institutions. According to Kaczmarek, the costs of reprivatization would not exceed about zl. 10 billion ($2.22 billion).
