CFM Files
Report of the Economic Commission for the Balkans and Finland on the Draft Peace Treaty With Bulgaria
Mr. Chairman: The Economic Commission for the Balkans and Finland considered the Draft of the Peace Treaty with Bulgaria at 4 meetings.
The Commission was composed of the Delegations of the U.S.A., Australia, Byelorussia S.S.R., Canada, Czechoslovakia, France, U.K., Greece, India, New Zealand, Ukrainian S.S.R, Union of South Africa, U.S.S.R. and Yugoslavia.
The Commission was under the Chairmanship of the Czechoslovakian Delegate, M. Korbel.
The Vice-Chairmen were the Australian Delegates Mr. Beasley and Senator Grant.
The Rapporteur elected by the Commission was M. Gerashchenko, Delegate of the U.S.S.R.
[Page 487]The task of the Commission was to study the economic provisions, and others connected with them, of the Draft Peace Treaties with Roumania, Bulgaria, Hungary and Finland prepared by the Council of Foreign Ministers, and likewise to submit possible recommendations or additions to these provisions.
The Commission considered the following Sections and Articles of the Draft Peace Treaty with Bulgaria:
| Section V. | Reparation and Restitution (Articles 20 and 21) |
| Section VI. | Economic Clauses (Articles 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30 and 31) |
| Section VII. | Clauses relating to the Danube (Article 32) |
| Annex 4. | Special Clauses relating to certain kinds of property |
| Annex 5. | Contracts, prescriptions and negotiable Instruments |
| Annex 6. | Judgments |
In the course of its deliberations the Commission considered the amendments proposed by the Australian Delegation (C.P.(Gen)Doc. 1–B 36/37, 1–B 39/40 and 1–B 42) and by the Greek Delegation (C.P. (Gen) Doc.1J.25 to 1J.34).
The Commission also received a number of additional proposals and amendments from Delegations who were members of the Commission, and these will be mentioned later and given in the text of this report. Further, the Representatives of the Bulgarian Government presented their views on the Draft Peace Treaty (C.P.(Gen)Doc.7). These views were duly considered. When the Articles dealing with Reparations were under consideration, the Representatives of the Bulgarian Government were invited to be present at the meetings of the Commission and expressed the views of the Bulgarian Government with regard to reparations.
In regard to the proposals and amendments which did not secure a majority of ⅔, the Commission, in accordance with the rules of procedure, should submit two or more reports. The Commission, however, agreed that the Rapporteur should give all the various points of view on which agreement had not been reached, in the general report, in order to avoid the necessity of submitting two or more reports.
As a result of the consideration of the amendments and proposals with regard to the various Articles, the Commission has come to the following conclusions:
Part V. Reparation and Restitution
Article 20—Reparation
The Commission unanimously recommends that this Article should be accepted in the wording purposed by the Council of Foreign [Page 488] Ministers, with the following addition which was proposed by the U.S.A. Delegation—“The basis for calculating the settlement provided for in this Article will be the United States dollar at its gold parity on July 1st, 1946, i.e. 35 dollars for one ounce of gold.”
The amendments proposed by the Australian Delegation to Article 20 of the draft Peace Treaty 1B36, 1B57 and 1B40 were withdrawn by that Delegation and the Greek amendment 1J25 was withdrawn after a statement made by the Greek Delegation. (Annex),52
As regards the amounts of reparation payments which Bulgaria should pay, the Commission did not take any decision or recommendations as none of the proposals put forward secured a ⅔ majority. The proposal made by the Greek Delegation to fix the amount of reparations at 200,000,000 American dollars secured one vote in favour (Greece) and 13 votes against (U.S.A., Australia, Byelorussia, Canada, France, U.K., India, New Zealand, Czechoslovakia, Ukraine, U.S.S.R., U.S.A., Yugoslavia). The proposal by the Yugoslavian Delegation to fix the amount of reparations at 25,000,000 American dollars secured 5 votes in favour (Byelorussia, Czechoslovakia, Ukraine, U.S.S.R., and Yugoslavia) and 9 votes against (U.S.A., Australia, Canada, France, U.K., Greece, India, New Zealand, South Africa). The proposal of the U.K. Delegation to fix the amount of reparations at 129,000,000 million dollars secured 9 votes in favour (U.S.A., Australia, Canada, France, U.K., Greece, India, New Zealand, South Africa) and 5 against (Byelorussia, Czechoslovakia, Ukraine, U.S.S.R., and Yugoslavia).
The Greek Delegation proposed that the following additional provisions should be added to Article 20 of the Draft Peace Treaty.
- “a) Bulgaria shall pay to Greece and Yugoslavia reparations to a value of 125,000,000 United States dollars, payable to the two countries in equal parts, within six years from the coming into force of the present Treaty, in kind (agricultural produce, livestock, coal and other products of Bulgaria’s economy, as well as locomotives, wagons and other railway material, etc.)
- b) The quantities and categories of goods to be delivered shall be determined by agreements to be concluded between the Governments of Greece and Yugoslavia, with Bulgaria. These agreements will be communicated to the Heads of the Diplomatic Missions in Sofia of the United States of America, United Kingdom and U.S.S.R.
- c) The prices of goods delivered under the present Article shall be calculated in levas on the basis of the official wholesale prices of goods concerned in Bulgaria. The levas shall be converted into dollars at the mean rate between the buying and selling rates (inclusive of premium) of the National Bank of Bulgaria for the dollar at the time [Page 489] of delivery. The cost of transport to a Greek or Yugoslav port or to the Greek or Yugoslav frontier shall be chargeable to the Bulgarian Government.”
There were 7 votes in favour of this proposal (Australia, Canada, U.K., Greece, India, New Zealand, South Africa) and 6 votes, against (U.S.A., Byelorussia, Czechoslovakia, U.K. [Ukraine], U.S.S.R. and Yugoslavia) with 1 abstention (France).
The Soviet Delegation made a statement to the effect that the Commission did not consider or examine the proposals presented by various Delegations on the question of the amount of reparations but had merely voted as a matter of routine on proposals which referred to the amount of reparations.
The U.S. Delegation made a statement that it had studied the question of reparation to be paid by Bulgaria and that in its statement at the meeting of the Commission it made an analysis of that question.
On the question of the Bulgarian reparation and especially on the amount of Reparation the Greek and Yugoslav Delegations made statement or reservations of which the text appears in annex.
Article 21—Article 21 was accepted unanimously by the Commission in the wording proposed by the Council of Foreign Ministers with the following additions:
1) In paragraph 1, the words “in the shortest possible time” shall be added and therefore this paragraph will read as follows:—“Bulgaria accepts the principle of the United Nations Declaration of January 5, 1943, and will return in the shortest possible time property removed from United Nations’Territories”.
2) There shall be an additional paragraph 2) as follows:—
If in particular cases it is impossible for Bulgaria to make restitution of objects of artistic, historic or archeological value belonging to the cultural heritage of the United Nation from which such objects were removed by force or duress by Bulgarian Forces and authorities or by Bulgarian nationals, Bulgaria undertakes to transfer to the United Nation concerned objects of the same kind and of substantially equivalent value to the objects removed, in so far as such objects are obtainable in Bulgaria.
This was accepted on the proposal of the Greek Delegation in place of the Greek proposal (C.P.(Gen)Doc.1.J.26);
The Greek Amendment 1.J.27 was rejected by the Commission by a majority of 12 votes to one with 1 abstention, whilst amendment 1.J.28 was withdrawn by the Greek Delegation after a statement (Annex).53
[Page 490]Part VI—Economic Clauses
Article 22—paragraphs 1, 2, 3, 5, 6 and 7 of this Article were unanimously accepted by the Commission in the wording proposed by the Council of Foreign Ministers.
The Australian Delegation withdrew its amendments C.P. (Gen) Doc.1B.38, 1B.39 and 1B.40.
The Greek Delegation altered the text of its amendment C.P.(Gen) Doc.1.J.29 stating that it considered it desirable to exclude from the text of its amendment the sentence “and in case they definitely give up their domicile in Bulgaria, they shall be entitled to take with them their movable property and transfer their funds.” When the vote was taken on the amended version, there were 4 votes in favour, 8 against and 2 abstentions.
Paragraph 8 of this Article was adopted by a majority of 13 with 1 abstention.
In regard to paragraph 4 of this Article, the Commission does not make any recommendations because none of the proposals put forward secured the required majority of ⅔ of the votes.
When paragraph 4 was under consideration, the first proposal voted on was that compensation should be paid in full. When a vote was taken 6 Delegations expressed themselves in favour of compensation in full (Australia. Canada, U.K., Greece, New Zealand, U.S.A. [Union of South Africa]) and 7 Delegations voted against (U.S.A., Byelorussia, France, Czechoslovakia, Ukraine, U.S.S.R., Yugoslavia) with 1 abstention (India).
Thereafter a vote was taken on the proposal of the U.S.A. Delegation which supported the Delegation of the U.S.S.R. that compensation should be to the extent of 25%. There were 5 votes in favour of this proposal (U.S.A., Byelorussia, Ukraine, U.S.S.R, Yugoslavia) and 9 against (Australia, Canada, France, U.K., Greece, India, New Zealand, Czechoslovakia, South Africa). A vote was then taken on the proposal of the French Delegation that compensation should be paid to the amount of 75%. This proposal secured 9 votes in favour (Australia, Canada, France, U.K., Greece, India, New Zealand, Czechoslovakia, Union of South Africa) with 4 against (Byelorussia, Ukraine, U.S.S.R., Yugoslavia) with 1 abstention (U.S.A.).
The United Kingdom Delegation and the Greek Delegation stated that their participation in the votes of the various proposals of partial compensation would imply no change in their position as regards the question of compensation and that they reserved their right to present their views, when the subject comes before the Plenary Conference.
In view of the result of the voting, the Commission did not adopt any recommendation in regard to the amount of compensation.
[Page 491]The Commission considered the text of paragraph 4 proposed by the Delegation of the U.S.A. to replace the proposal contained in the Draft Peace Treaty with Bulgaria. The text of this proposal is as follows:
- “(a) The Bulgarian Government will be responsible for the restoration to complete good order of the property returned to United Nations nationals under paragraph 1 of this Article. In cases where property cannot be returned or where as a result of the war a United Nations national has suffered a loss by reason of injury or damage to property, he shall receive from the Bulgarian Government compensation in levas to the extent of—per cent of the sum necessary, at the date of payment, to purchase similar property or to make good the loss suffered. In no event shall the United Nations nationals receive less favorable treatment with respect to compensation than that accorded to Bulgarian nationals”.
- “(b) United Nations nationals who have ownership interests, held directly or indirectly in corporations or associations which are not United Nations nationals within the meaning of paragraph 8 (a) of this Article, but which have suffered a loss by reason of injury or damage to property shall receive compensation in accordance with sub-paragraph (a) above. This compensation shall be based on the total loss or damage suffered by the corporation or association and shall bear the same proportion to such loss or damage as the beneficial interest of such nationals bears to the total capital of the corporation or association”.
- “(c) Compensation shall be paid free of any levies, taxes or other charges. It shall be freely usable in Bulgaria but shall be subject to the foreign exchange control regulations which may be in force in Bulgaria from time to time”.
- “(d) The Bulgarian Government agrees to accord to United Nations nationals fair and equitable treatment in the allocation of materials for the repair or rehabilitation of their property and in the allocation of foreign exchange for the importation of such material and will in no event discriminate in these respects against such nationals as compared with Bulgarian nationals”.
- “(e) The Bulgarian Government agrees similarly to compensate in levas United Nations nationals whose property has suffered loss or damage as a result of special measures taken against their property during the war which were not applied to Bulgarian property.”
An amendment was made to sub-paragraph “a” by the Delegation of the Soviet Union to the effect that the last sentence of sub-paragraph “a” be replaced by the following text:
“In no event shall United Nations nationals, including those who have ownership interests, held directly or indirectly, in corporations or associations, receive less favourable treatment with respect to compensation than that accorded to Bulgarian nationals.”
The voting resulted in 5 for and 9 votes against this amendment.
Sub-paragraph “a” of this proposal received 9 votes for (U.S.A., Australia, Canada, France, U.K., Greece, India, New Zealand, and [Page 492] Union of South Africa) and 4 votes against (Byelorussia, Ukraine, U.S.S.R., and Yugoslavia) with one abstention (Czechoslovakia).
Sub-paragraphs “b”, “c” and “d” of the U.S.A. proposal received 9 votes for (U.S.A., Australia, Canada, France, U.K., Greece, India, New Zealand and the Union of South Africa) and 5 votes against (Byelorussia, Czechoslovakia, Ukraine, U.S.S.R. and Yugoslavia). The Yugoslav delegation declared that its former declaration concerning sub-paragraph “b” of paragraph 4 of Article 24 of the Peace Treaty with Roumania is equally valid for the Peace Treaty with Bulgaria.
The French delegation moved an amendment which reads as follows concerning sub-paragraph “e”:
“The Bulgarian Government shall grant nationals of the United Nations an indemnity in levas sufficient to compensate, at the date of payment, the loss and damage due to the special measures taken against their property during the war, and which were not applied to Bulgarian property.”
This amendment received 8 votes in favour (Australia, Canada, France, U.K., Greece, India, New Zealand, Union of South Africa) and 6 votes against (U.S.A., Byelorussia, Czechoslovakia, Ukraine, U.S.S.R. and Yugoslavia). Consequently, sub-paragraph “e” of the U.S.A. proposal was not put to the vote.
Article 23. The Commission unanimously adopted this Article after deleting the words “qui ont été” before “transférés” in the French text.
Article 24 The Commission did not adopt any recommendation on this Article, since the two proposals which were voted on contained in the draft Peace Treaty—one being the proposal of the U.S.A., U.K. and French Delegations and the second, the proposal of the U.S.S.R. Delegation, did not receive a majority of two-thirds of the votes.
5 votes were given in favour of the Soviet proposal (Byelorussia, Czechoslovakia, Ukraine, U.S.S.R. and Yugoslavia) and 9 votes were against (U.S.A., Australia, Canada, France, U.K., Greece, India, New Zealand, Union of South Africa).
The Australian Delegation moved amendments to sub-paragraphs 4 and 5 of Article 24 proposed by the Delegations of the U.S.A., U.K. and France. The Australian Delegation proposed in paragraph 4 to delete the words “literary and artistic” and to insert in paragraph 5 after sub-paragraph “d” the following new sub-paragraph “e” “literary and artistic property rights”.
These amendments secured 8 votes in favour, 3 against, with 3 abstentions.
The results of the voting on the U.S.A., U.K. and French proposals in respect of paragraphs 1, 2 and 3, secured 7 votes in favour and 4 votes [Page 493] against. There were 3 abstentions. For paragraph 4 including the sub-paragraphs a, b, c and d, there were 9 votes for, 3 votes against and 2 abstentions. For paragraph 5 (including the above-mentioned Australian amendment) there were 6 votes for, 4 votes against and 4 abstentions.
Article 25. The Commission likewise did not adopt any recommendations for Article 25 of the draft Peace Treaty.
The Soviet Delegation moved an amendment to its proposal as set out in the draft Peace Treaty. The Soviet Delegation proposed to replace the second sentence of point 1 of Article 25 of the draft by the following text:
“The rights of Bulgarian owners with respect to the disposal of the property in question, shall also be restored in so far as no other joint decisions are taken in this connection by the powers signatory to the Armistice terms or to the terms of the capitulation.”
The proposal of the Soviet Delegation concerning Article 25 (including the above-mentioned amendment) received in its favour 5 votes (Byelorussia, Czechoslovakia, Ukraine, U.S.S.R. and Yugoslavia), 9 votes were against (U.S.A., Australia, Canada, France, Greece, India, New Zealand, Union of South Africa, U.K.).
The proposal of the U.K., U.S.A. and France received 9 votes (U.S.A., Australia, Canada, France, U.K., Greece, India, New Zealand, Union of South Africa) to 5 (Byelorussia, Czechoslovakia, Ukraine, U.S.S.R. and Yugoslavia).
Article 26. This Article was unanimously adopted by the Commission in the drafting proposed by the Council of Foreign Ministers. The amendment of the Greek Delegation to this Article (I.J.30) was rejected by 12 votes to one. There was one abstention.
The proposal of the Greek Delegation (I.J.31) for the insertion of a supplementary Article after Article 26 was withdrawn by the Greek Delegation.
Article 27. Article 27 of the draft Treaty was unanimously adopted by the Commission in the drafting proposed by the Council of Foreign Ministers with an amendment moved by the Norwegian Delegation to paragraph 5 of this Article. This amendment proposed that the words: “which severed diplomatic relations with Bulgaria and took action …” should be replaced by the words: “whose diplomatic relations with Bulgaria were severed during the war and which took action …”
Consequently paragraph 3 was adopted in the following drafting:
“Bulgaria likewise waived all claims of the nature covered by paragraph 1 of this Article on behalf of the Bulgarian Government or Bulgarian nationals against any of the United Nations whose [Page 494] diplomatic relations with Bulgaria were broken off during the war and which took action in co-operation with the Allied and Associated Powers.”
The amendment of the Greek Delegation 1.J.32 has been withdrawn, after a statement of this Delegation. (See Annex.)
Article 28. Sub-paragraphs (a) and (b) of paragraph 1 of this Article were unanimously adopted by the Commission in the drafting proposed by the Council of Foreign Ministers.
The text of sub-paragraph (c) of paragraph 1 of this Article, in the drafting proposed by the U.S.S.R. Delegation received 5 votes in its favour (Byelorussia, Czechoslovakia, Ukraine, U.S.S.R., and Yugoslavia) to 9 votes against (U.S.A., Australia, Canada, France, U.K., Greece, India, New Zealand, Union of South Africa).
The voting on sub-paragraph (c) of paragraph 1 of this Article in the draft proposed by the U.K., U.S.A. and French Delegations resulted in 9 votes in favour (U.S.A., Australia, Canada, France, U.K., Greece, India, New Zealand, Union of South Africa) to 5 votes against (Byelorussia, Czechoslovakia, Ukraine, U.S.S.R., and Yugoslavia).
The proposal of the U.S.A. Delegation concerning civil aviation supported by the U.K. Delegation, was put to the vote in a modified drafting which reads as follows:
“It is further understood that the foregoing provisions of paragraph (c) shall not apply to civil aviation, but that Bulgaria will grant no exclusive or discriminatory right to any country with regard to the operation of civil aircraft in international traffic and will afford all the United Nations equality of opportunity for obtaining international commercial aviation rights in Bulgarian territory.”
There were 9 votes for to 5 against.
The French Delegation proposed to replace the last paragraph of the above-mentioned proposal by the following text:
“It is further understood that the foregoing provisions of paragraph (c) shall not apply to civil aviation, but that Bulgaria will grant no exclusive or discriminatory right to any country with regard to the operation of civil aircraft in international traffic, will afford all the United Nations equality of opportunity in obtaining international commercial aviation rights in Bulgarian territory, and will grant to all the United Nations on a basis of reciprocity and without discrimination, with regard to the operation of civil aircraft in international traffic, the right to fly over Bulgarian territory without landing and to make landings in Roumanian territory for non-commercial purposes.”
This amendment of the French Delegation received 7 votes to 5. There were 2 abstentions.
The text proposed by the U.S.S.R, Delegation for paragraph 2 of Article 28 of the draft Treaty received 5 votes (Byelorussia, Czechoslovakia, [Page 495] Ukraine, U.S.S.R, and Yugoslavia) to 9 votes against (U.S.A., Australia, Canada, France, U.K., Greece, India, New Zealand, Union of South Africa). The text proposed by the Delegations of France, U.K. and U.S.A. received 9 votes to 5.
New Article. After the Greek amendment 1.J. 33 had been withdrawn, the French Delegation proposed that after Article 28 of the Draft Treaty a new article should be included as follows:
“Bulgaria shall facilitate as far as possible railway traffic in transit through its territory at reasonable rates and shall negotiate with neighbouring States all reciprocal agreements necessary for this purpose.
The proposal received 9 votes (U.S.A., Australia, Canada, France, U.K., Greece, India, New Zealand and Union of South Africa) to 4 (Byelorussia, Ukraine, U.S.S.R., and Yugoslavia). There was 1 abstention (Czechoslovakia).
Article 29. The Commission did not adopt any recommendation for this Article, since the two proposals set out in the draft Peace Treaty and—one by the U.K. and the other by the U.S.S.R. Delegations—did not secure a majority of two-thirds of the votes. The proposal of the U.K. Delegation received 8 votes (U.S.A., Canada, France, U.K., Greece, India, New Zealand, Union of South Africa) to 5 votes against (Byelorussia, Czechoslovakia, Ukraine, U.S.S.R. and Yugoslavia). There was one abstention (Australia). The proposal of the U.S.S.R. Delegation received 3 votes to 9.
The U.S.A. Delegation withdrew its amendment to Article 29 of the draft Peace Treaty with Bulgaria, submitted by the Council of Foreign Ministers.
In this connection, as noted by the Chairman of the Commission, the proposal by the French Delegation is regarded now unnecessary.
Article 30. This Article was unanimously adopted by the Commission in the drafting proposed by the Council of Foreign Ministers with the following modification, inserted in accordance with the amendment of the Norwegian Delegation; instead of the words “which have broken off diplomatic relations with Bulgaria” insert the words “whose diplomatic relations with Bulgaria have broken off with Bulgaria [sic] during the war”.
This Article 30 of the draft Treaty was adopted in the following drafting:
“Articles 21, 22 and Annex 6 of the present Treaty shall apply to the Allied and Associated Powers and France and to those of the United Nations whose diplomatic relations with Bulgaria have been broken off during the war.”
Article 31. Article 31 was unanimously adopted in the drafting proposed by the Council of Foreign Ministers.
[Page 496]Part VII. Clauses Relating to the Danube
Article 32. The French Delegation tabled a new proposal for this Article, Supported by the U.S.A. and U.K. Delegations, who withdrew their original proposals on the draft Peace Treaty with Bulgaria. The Greek amendment I.J.34 was also withdrawn. The text of the French proposal reads as follows:
- “1. Navigation on the Danube River shall be free and open on terms of entire equality to the nationals, vessels of commerce and goods of all States;
- 2. With a view to ensuring the practical application of this principle, Bulgaria undertakes to take part, together with France, the U.S.S.R., the United Kingdom, the United States of America and the Danubian States, in a Conference which shall be convened within six months of the entry into force of this Peace Treaty, with the object of establishing a new International Regime for the Danube”
In the voting on this proposal, 8 votes were cast in favour (U.S.A., Australia, Canada, France, U.K., Greece, New Zealand, Union of South Africa), to 5 votes against (Byelorussia, Czechoslovakia, Ukraine, U.S.S.R., Yugoslavia) with one abstention (India). Therefore, the Commission was unable to recommend the inclusion of Article 32 in the draft Peace Treaty and referred this question to the decision of the Plenary Conference.
Statements or reservations in connection with this Article were made by the following delegations: Belgium, Poland, Greece, United Kingdom, France and Yugoslavia (Annex).
Annex 4. Special Provisions Relating to Certain Kinds of Property
section a. industrial, literary and artistic property
(1) The Commission unanimously recommended the adoption of paragraphs 1, 2, 3, 5, 6 and 8 of this section, without changing the drafting set out in the draft Peace Treaty with Bulgaria.
(2) The Commission unanimously recommended to substitute paragraph 4 of Section A by a new text, reading as follows:
“The foregoing provisions concerning the rights of the Allied and Associated Powers or their nationals shall apply equally to Bulgaria and its nationals. But nothing in these provisions shall entitle Bulgaria or its nationals to more favourable treatment in the territory of any of the Allied and Associated Powers than is accorded by such Power in like cases to other United Nations or their nationals, nor shall Bulgaria be required thereby to accord, to any of the Allied or Associated Powers or its nationals more favourable treatment than Bulgaria or its nationals receive in the territory of such Power in regard to the matters dealt with in the foregoing provisions.”
In consequence, the remarks made by the U.S.S.R., and U.S.A. Delegation to this paragraph on the draft Peace Treaty do not apply.
(3) The Commission unanimously recommended the adoption of paragraph 7, Section A drafted as follows:
“Bulgaria shall extend the benefits of Section A of this Annex to France and to other United Nations, other, than Allied or Associated Powers whose diplomatic relations with Bulgaria have been broken off during the war and which undertake to extend to Bulgaria the benefits accorded to Bulgaria under Section A of this Annex.”
The Unanimous adoption of this text by the Commission implied that the comments of the U.S.S.R, Delegation on this paragraph contained in the text of the draft Peace Treaty are disposed of.
section b. insurance
The U.K. Delegation, in substitution of the proposal included in the draft Peace Treaty with Bulgaria moved a new proposal reading as follows:
“The Allied and Associated Powers have noted the measures of nationalisation of insurance taken by the Bulgarian Government on the 18th June 1946. To the extent that these measures render any United Nations insurers, unable to, resume their portfolios, the compensation to be provided by the Bulgarian Government shall be a subject of direct negotiation outside the present treaty between the Bulgarian Government and the United Nations Government concerned.”
In the voting on the U.K. Delegation’s proposal, 6 votes were cast in favour, (Australia, Canada, U.K. Union of South Africa) 5 votes against (Byelorussia, Czechoslovakia, Ukraine, U.S.S.R. and Yugoslavia) with 3 abstentions (U.S.A., France arid India).
The U.S.S.R. Delegation suggested not to include in the draft Peace Treaty with Bulgaria a special section, with a provision on insurance. 5 Delegations (Byelorussia, Czechoslovakia, Ukraine, U.S.S.R. and Yugoslavia) voted in favour of this proposal; 7 Delegations (Australia, Canada, U.K., Greece, India, New Zealand and the Union of South Africa) voted against and 2 delegations abstained (U.S.A. and France).
Annex V. Contracts, Prescriptions and Negotiable Instruments
The Commission did not make any recommendations on the question of including this provision in the draft Treaty, as none of the sections of this Annex obtained a two-thirds majority.
[Page 498]i. contracts
The U.S.S.R. Delegation proposed not to include this section into the draft Peace Treaty. 5 Delegations voted in favour of this proposal, 5 against, with 4 abstentions.
The U.K. Delegation proposed to insert in the draft Peace Treaty, a paragraph on Contracts as set out in the draft of the Peace Treaty with Bulgaria, with an alteration to paragraph 1 of this Section. This paragraph was proposed to the Commission in the following wording:
“Any contract concluded between enemies shall be deemed to have been dissolved as from the time when any of the parties became an enemy, except in respect of any debt accrued or money paid or other pecuniary obligation arising out of any act done thereunder and subject to the exceptions set out in the following paragraph and subject to the repayment of amounts paid as advances or on account and in respect of which no counterpart exists.
“The provisions of this paragraph shall not apply to contracts of insurance and reinsurance, which shall be subject to a separate agreement.”
The proposal of the U.K. Delegation to include in the Draft of the Peace Treaty a Section to cover Contracts with an amendment to the wording of paragraph 1, was supported by 5 Delegations with 7 against and 2 abstentions.
The U.S.A. Delegation proposed the addition of a new 5th paragraph to Annex 5. The wording proposed for this new paragraph was as follows:
“Having regard to the legal system of the United States of America, the provisions of this Annex shall not apply as between the United States of America and Bulgaria.”
This proposal by the U.S.A. Delegation received 6 votes in favour, 5 votes against and 3 abstentions.
ii. periods of prescription
The U.S.S.R. Delegation proposed the inclusion in the draft Peace Treaty of a Section covering Periods of Prescription worded as follows:
- “1. All periods of prescription or limitation of right of action in regard to mutual relations with reference to property, between Bulgarian physical or juridical persons, on the one hand, and United Nations physical or juridical persons on the other hand, irrespective of whether these periods commenced before or after the outbreak of war, shall be regarded as having been suspended in Bulgarian territory for the duration of the war on condition that the United Nation concerned will also, on conditions of reciprocity, regard these periods of prescription in respect of the mutual relations stated above, as having been suspended in its territory.
- They will begin to run again three months after the entry into force of the present treaty.
- 2. The provisions of Article 1 of the present Annex will be applicable in regard to the periods fixed for the redemption of securities or their coupons, and likewise to any transactions relating to such securities.”
The Soviet Delegation agreed:—
- (a)
- To the Yugoslav amendment providing for the inclusion in the 1st sentence, after the words “right of action” of the words “or of the enforcement of any act or formality as a measure of security.”
- (b)
- To the amendment proposed by the French Delegation to add after the word “relations” words “persons and …”
The proposal of the U.S.S.R. received the support of 6 Delegations, with 6 against and 2 abstentions.
The U.K. Delegation proposed the inclusion in the draft Peace Treaty with Bulgaria of a paragraph dealing with Prescription in the terms given in the draft Peace Treaty with the addition of paragraph 8 worded as follows:—
“For the purpose of these Sections of the present Annex relating to periods of prescription and negotiable instruments, the parties to a contract shall be regarded as enemies when trading between them shall have been prohibited by or otherwise become unlawful under laws, orders or regulations to which one of these parties or the contract was subject. They shall be deemed to have become enemies from the date when such trading was prohibited or otherwise become unlawful.[”]
The proposal of the U.K. Delegation secured 6 votes in favour, 6 votes against and 2 abstentions.
iii. negotiable instruments
The U.S.S.R. Delegation proposed to omit the section dealing with Negotiable Instruments from the draft Peace Treaty. This proposal was supported by 5 delegations, with 7 against and 2 delegations abstained.
The U.K. Delegation proposed to include in the Peace Treaty with Bulgaria, a Section dealing with Negotiable Instruments in the wording given in the draft Peace Treaty. This proposal was supported by 7 Delegations with 5 against, and 2 abstentions.
iv. miscellaneous
The Soviet Delegation proposed to omit this section from the Peace Treaty. This proposal received 6 votes in favour, 6 against with 2 abstentions.
The U.K. Delegation proposed to include in the Peace Treaty with Bulgaria Section IV of Annex 5, in the wording set out in the Draft [Page 500] Peace Treaty. This proposal secured 6 votes in favour, 6 against, and 2 abstentions.
The Canadian Delegation stated that it refrained from voting on Annex 5 as worded by the U.K. Delegation, on the grounds that it is still considering how the provisions of Annex 5 would apply to Federal States, and may make a reservation on this question when it comes before the Plenary Conference.
Annex 6. Judgments
The Commission makes no recommendations with regard to this Annex in regard to which the Council of Foreign Ministers presented three Drafts.
The U.S.A. draft which was supported by the U.S.S.R. Delegation secured 7 votes in favour—5 against and 2 abstentions.
The proposal of the French Delegation secured 1 vote in favour, 10 against, with 3 abstentions.
The proposal by the U.K. Delegation secured 5 votes in favour, 6 against and 3 abstentions.
The Commission, therefore, submits for the consideration of the Conference—
- 1
- —The U.S.A. proposed supported by the Delegation of the U.S.S.R. which secured 7 votes.
- 2
- —The proposal of the U.K. Delegation which secured 5 votes.
Conclusions
This, Mr. Chairman, is a brief report on the work of our Commission and the results it has achieved with regard to the Draft Peace Treaty with Bulgaria.
I have the honour to submit the present report to the Conference, in the name of the Economic Commission for the Balkans and Finland, for the Conference to consider it, approve our conclusions and make recommendations on the points upon which the Commission was unable to come to a definite decision.
I would ask the Conference to approve the Commission’s recommendation to accept the following Articles, which were unanimously agreed in the Commission or received a two-thirds or more majority.
(a) Articles and paragraphs of the Draft Treaty, which were unanimously agreed without amendment.
Article 20, part 1 with the exception of the amount of indemnities.
Article 21, paragraphs 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7.
Article 22, paragraphs 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7;
Article 23, (entire)
Article 26, (entire)
Article 27, paragraphs 1, 2, 4.
Article 28, paragraph 1, with sub. Paras. “a” and “b”.
[Page 501]Article 31, (entire)
Annex 4 “A” paragraphs 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 8.
(b) Amendments and alterations unanimously adopted.
Article 20, second part.
Article 21, paragraphs 1 and 2.
Article 27, paragraph 3.
Article 30
Annex 4 A, para. 4 and 7.
(c) Articles and paragraphs of the draft Treaty adopted by a two-thirds majority or over.
Article 22, paragraph 8.
I would also ask the Conference to express its opinion, by means of a separate voting, on the following points, on which the Commission was unable to make recommendations.
Article 20, British proposal on the amount of indemnities, which received 9 votes to 5.
Article 20, Yugoslav proposal on the amount of indemnities, which received 5 votes to 9.
Article 20, Greek proposal on an addition to the text of the Article, which received 7 votes to 6, with one abstention.
Article 22, British proposal on full compensation, which received 6 votes to 7, with one abstention.
Article 22, American-Soviet proposal on 25% compensation, which received 5 votes to 9.
Article 22, French proposal on 75% compensation, which received 9 votes to 4, with one abstention.
Article 22, American proposal on paragraph 4, sub-paragraph a), which received 9 votes to 4, with one abstention, and subparagraphs b), c), d), which received 9 votes to 5.
Article 22, paragraph 4, sub-paragraph “e”, which received 8 votes to 6.
Article 24, paragraphs 1, 2 and 3, as proposed by the U.S.A., U.K. and French Delegations, which received 7 votes to 4, with 3 abstentions.
Article 24, paragraph 4, with amendment, submitted by the Australian Delegation, which received 9 votes to 3, with 2 abstentions.
Article 24, paragraph 5, sub-paragraphs a, b, c, d, which received 6 votes to 4, with 4 abstentions.
Article 24, paragraph 5, e, Australian proposal, which received 8 votes to 3, with 3 abstentions.
Article 24, proposal of the U.S.S.R. Delegation, which received 5 votes to 9.
Article 25, proposal of the U.S.S.R. Delegation, which received 5 votes to 9.
Article 25, proposal of the U.S.A., U.K., and French Delegations, which received 9 votes to 5.
[Page 502]Article 28, paragraph 1, sub-paragraph “c”in the drafting proposed by the U.S.S.R. Delegation, which received 5 votes to 9.
Article 28, paragraph 1, sub-paragraph “c” in the drafting proposed by the U.S.A., U.K., and French Delegations, which received 9 votes to 5.
Article 28, American proposal on the addition to sub-paragraph c., paragraph 1, of the resolution on civil aviation, which received 9 votes to 5.
Article 28, French proposal on the addition to sub-paragraph c., paragraph 1, of resolution on civil aviation which received 7 votes to 5, with 2 abstentions.
Article 28, paragraph 2 in the drafting proposed by the Soviet Delegation, which received 5 votes to 9.
Article 28, paragraph 2 in the drafting proposed by the U.S.A., U.K. and French Delegations which received 9 votes to 5.
Article 28 bis, which received 9 votes to 4, with one abstention.
Article 29 in the drafting proposed by the U.K. Delegation, which received 8 votes to 5, with 7 abstentions.
Article 29, in the drafting proposed by the U.S.S.R. Delegation, which received 5 votes to 9.
Article 32, which received 8 votes to 5, with one abstention.
Annex 4, section B, which received 6 votes to 5, with 3 abstentions.
Annex 5, section I, which received 5 votes to 7, with 2 abstentions.
Annex 5, section II, in the drafting proposed by the U.S.S.R. Delegation, which received 6 votes to 6, with 2 abstentions.
Annex 5, section II, in the drafting proposed by the U.K. Delegation which received 6 votes to 6, with 2 abstentions.
Annex 5, section III, in the drafting proposed by the U.K. Delegation, which received 7 votes to 5, with 2 abstentions.
Annex 5, section IV, in the drafting proposed by the U.K. Delegation which received 6 votes to 6, with 2 abstentions.
Annex 5, proposed by the U.S.A. Delegation to include section V, which received 6 votes to 5 with 3 abstentions.
Annex 6, proposal by the U.S.A. Delegation, seconded by the U.S.S.R. Delegation, which received 7 votes to 5 with 2 abstentions.
Annex 6, proposal by the U.K. Delegation, which received 5 votes to 6 with 3 abstentions.