Property Restitution: Why Did It Go So Wrong in Romania?

NEW* SAR report quoted in ECHR decision. Read here Viasu c. Romania

Apart from the judicial details of the restitution program, two traits set Romania apart in Central and Eastern Europe: the inability to decide between in-kind compensation v. financial restitutions, with successive laws creating confusion and overlapping rights; large-scale abuse on both local and central levels, sustained by ambiguous laws and discrete judicial practices, can be seen in the questionable discrepancies of the restitution process from one county to the other. SAR has initiated the first numerical indicator analysis of the restitution process, showing who is responsible and what they are responsible for. This preliminary report sums up the current situation. The full report is available in PDF format.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *