Latvia Under German Occupation in 1943Latvian Legation, 1944

Promised Restoration of City Buildings
Also Not Realized

The “First Executive Decree” regarding the Restoration of Nationalized Private City Buildings was signed by Reich Commissar Lohse on March 1, 1943. The announcement is worded as follows, as given in the “Kauener Zeitung” of March 5 1943:

1) In accordance with Article 2 of the Property decree, those natives are entitled to submit petitions who were inscribed as owners in the real estate records (mortgage records) at the time of their closing. Those alien returned colonists (Nachumsiedler) who have received their final certificates of repatriation (Germans who were repatriated in 1939-40 and now return) are comparable to natives. Should the registered owner be dead, the petition may be submitted by his heirs. If the trustee of the estate is present, only he may submit the petition. The trustee of the absentee may submit the petition for deported persons and for persons whose residence is unknown.

2) The petition for transfer of property rights to real estate is to be submitted to the county commissar in whose county the land lies. The petition must contain: (a) occupation, name and address of the petitioner, and a precise description of the real estate. The petition should have attached to it a certificate from the land records official giving a description of the land in accordance with the land records and of the registered owner. If the petitioner is the heir of the registered owner, an inheritance certificate should also be attached to the petition. For this purpose certificates should be issued free of all dues.

3) A petition is unnecessary if the former owners after the decree regarding the administration of city buildings dated December 15, 1941, (VB1. RKOS. 96) have received back the administration and use of their city buildings. The petition requesting the administration and use of property serves also as the petition foreseen in article 2 of the property decree, if two weeks after the promulgation of this announcement the notified person has not informed the real estate association in writing that he renounces the transfer of the property. Renunciation is final. If the request for administration and use has been rejected, the person authorized by the real estate association may submit the renewed copy of the request after the Property decree.

4) Only inscription in the real estate or mortgage records is of decisive importance for the transfer of property. If the inscribed owner or his heirs for some reason prove not to be the entitled owner, claims may be raised as soon as the violation of property rights has been disclosed. In accordance with Article 5, Section 2, of the First Executive Decree, the person authorized to raise the claims may do so in a juridical manner before the local courts. The local court shall determine the change in the inscription in the real estate records and the legality of the decrees previously made.

This decree was followed by a “Second Decree,” which was signed by Reich Commissar Lohse on April 20, 1943. Its first articles read as follows:

“1) In accordance with the stipulations of this decree, the real estate records (mortgage records) are to be reopened for the built real estate lots whose buildings have not been nationalized.

“2) City buildings having a usable floor space of not more than 170 sq. meters, or in communities specifically determined by the Commissar General of not more than 220 sq. meters, which are administered in their own name by the former owners or their legal heirs, may be treated as not having been nationalized.”

In regard to this article the D.Z.O. on May 4, 1943, published the following explanation: “Petitions for the return of property rights to buildings which have a larger usable floor space and have nevertheless not been nationalized must be submitted to the proper county commissar in accordance with the stipulations of the First Executive decree, just as if they had been nationalized by the Bolsheviks.”

No official figures have yet been published as to how many buildings and lots of land have been returned to their former owners in the cities of Latvia. However, if one makes an estimate of the figures which have been announced over the Riga broadcasting station regarding individual cases of real estate restored in individual cities, one can definitely say that this figure lies between 1,500 and 2,000, and in no case can it exceed the last figure.

If one then takes into consideration (a) that Riga alone had some 15,000 apartment buildings, Jelgava (Mitau) more than 2,000, etc.; (b) that all the best pieces of property are occupied by the occupation authorities, and that not a single word has been ever said by the authorities regarding their restoration, it should be more than clear that the decree of Rosenberg and its practical effectuation will least of all in the cities give cause for any further trust in the policy of the Germans and in their promises.