CO537-(1262-1649) — Page 254

8

18

ch

ch

ts

en-

reated

proper-

t of

by the

lat

1

P

lave

10

ts

16

les

Lons

>tion

3 in

.ness

зе

:nded

the

gulate

2

cms

Ref.:

CO 537/1374

THE NATIONAL ARCHIVES

Ins

2

restrictions. Further information is given in the enclosed Terms and Conditions of supply of National Archives' leaflet. Please note that this copy is supplied subject to the National Archives' terms and conditions and that your use of it may be subject to copyright,

ins-

le rmans

Ig

608

.d:

00039

-11-

"The Bank of Belgium is a private institution is autonomy must be respected; it is the mistress of its destiny and its council must have complete liberty of action. Under the law of nations, the occupant cannot appoint an administration, cannot impose any line of conduct, and cannot remove any assets. One of the most fundamental and most precious maxims of modern international law is involved: the respect of private property in land warfare".

39

And the author Feilchenfeld himself, cited by the defendant

said that the validity of Section III of the Hague Regulations was not

denied during World War 1, and since then, the validity and applicability

of Articles 42 to 56 of said section were confirmed in a great number of

decisions of international and domestic tribunals. They were never

doubted by any party in a controversy nor questioned by any government.

(Page 5, par. 13, Supra.)

Even if the Hague Regulations did not so provide, we think that

the confiscatory acts of the Japanese invader affecting the credit in

question cannot merit recognition. In the first place, such acts are

not sanctioned by the municipal law of the former sovereignty which is

now victorious. In the second place, the invader did not have plenary

powers of sovereignty, but only powers within the limits of international

law. Those were the precarious powers of a mere belligerent occupant,

exercised during the existence of war. The defeated invader, thereofre,

cannot insist in the recognition of its acts of confiscation which were

against the laws of the conqueror. In the last world war, the United

Nations, prior to the sequestration and disposition of the credit in question by the Japanese, unmistakably declared their policy not to

recognize the confiscatory acts of the Axis nations in the territories occupied by them. Said declaration, dated January 5, 1943, states that the United Nations give formal notice to all the interested parties of

their intention to adopt extreme measures to annul the mehtods of

dispossession effected by the governments with which they are at war against those countries and nations who have been wantonly assaulted and despoiled, wherefore, they reserve the right to declare invalid any transfers of, or dealings with, property, rights and interests of any description whatsoever which are, or have been located in the territories which have fallen under the occupation or control, direct or indirect, of the governments with which they are at war, or which belong or have be-

1

cms

Ref.:

CO 537/1374

THE NATIONAL ARCHIVES

2

restrictions. Further information is given in the enclosed Terms and Conditions of supply of National Archives' leaflet.

Please note that this copy is supplied subject to the National Archives' terms and conditions and that your use of it may be subject to copyright