CFM Files
Report of the Economic Commission for the Balkans and Finland on the Draft Peace Treaty With Finland
Mr. Chairman: The Economic Commission for the Balkans and Finland considered the draft of the Peace Treaty with Finland at one meeting.
[Page 574]The Commission was composed of the Delegates of the U.S.A., Australia, Byelorussian S.S.R., Canada, France, U.K., Greece, India, New Zealand, Czechoslovakia, Ukrainian S.S.R., Union of South Africa, U.S.S.R. and Yugoslavia.
The Commission met under the chairmanship of the Czechoslovak Delegate, M. Korbel. The Vice-Chairmen of the Commission were the Australian Delegates Mr. Beasley and Senator Grant. The representative of the U.S.S.R., M. Gerashchenko, was elected Rapporteur to the Commission.
The task of the Commission was to examine the economic and related provision in the draft Peace Treaties with Roumania, Bulgaria, Hungary and Finland, which were prepared by the Council of Foreign Ministers and likewise to submit any possible recommendations for alterations or additions to these provisions.
The Commission considered the following parts and Articles of the draft Peace Treaty with Finland.
| Part IV. | Reparation and restitution (Articles 22 and 23) |
| Part V. | Economic clauses (Articles 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30 & 31) |
| Annex 4. | Special provisions relating to certain kinds of property |
| Annex 5. | Contracts, prescriptions and negotiable instruments |
| Annex 6. | Prize courts and judgments |
In the course of its work, the Commission considered the amendments proposed by the Australian Delegation (C.P.(Gen)Doc.1.B.64, 1.B.66, 1.B.67 and 1.B.68) and the U.K. Delegation (C.P.(Gen)Doc. 1.P.1). The Commission received a number of additional proposals and amendments from the Delegations who were members of the Commission and these will be referred to in the text of the report and will be quoted.
The Commission decided likewise to request the representatives of the Finnish Government to submit to it a detailed memorandum in regard to those Articles and provisions of the Peace Treaty with Finland which were referred to this Commission.
This memorandum was submitted to the Secretariat General of the Conference under the heading “Observations submitted by the Finnish Government on the draft Peace Treaty with Finland” (C.P.-(Gen)Doc.61).
On proposals and amendments which did not secure a majority of two-thirds of the votes, the Commission, in accordance with the Rules of Procedure, should submit two or more reports. However, the Commission agreed that the Rapporteur should set out all the views which have not been agreed in the general report in order to avoid the necessity of having two or several reports.
[Page 575]As a result of consideration of Articles, proposals and amendments listed above, the Commission came to the following conclusions.
Part IV. Reparation and Restitution
Article 22—Reparation. With regard to this Article, the Australian Delegation withdrew its amendments (C.P.(Gen)Doc.1.B.64, C.P.-(Gen) Doc.1.B.67, C.P.(Gen) Doc.1.B.68).
The U.S.A. Delegation introduced an amendment to reduce the sum of reparation to 200,000,000 American dollars. At the meeting it declared that this amendment was based on the observations of the Finnish Government.
After consultation with the Deputy General Secretary the President declared that the U.S.A. amendment had been submitted contrary to the decision on final date, which had been taken with regard to the submission of amendments, and was also not in accordance with the timetable of work which the Commission had adopted, and in view of this the Chairman declined to include the American amendment on the agenda.
In the course of the voting on the Article in the wording set out by the Council of Foreign Ministers, 9 Delegations (Byelorussia, France, U.K., Greece, India, Czechoslovakia, Ukrainian S.S.R., U.S.S.R. and Yugoslavia) voted in favour and 4 Delegations (U.S.A., Canada, New Zealand, Union of South Africa) voted against. One Delegation (Australia) abstained.
Article 23. Article 23 was unanimously adopted by the Commission in the wording proposed by the Council of Foreign Ministers.
Part V. Economic Clauses
Article 24. Paragraphs 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7 and 8 of this Article were unanimously adopted by the Commission in the wording proposed by the Council of Foreign Ministers.
With regard to paragraph 4 of this Article, the Commission makes no recommendation as none of the proposals secured the necessary majority of two-thirds.
In the consideration of paragraph 4, a vote was taken first on the suggestion that full compensation should be paid. The vote resulted in 6 Delegations being in favour of compensation in full (Australia, Canada, U.K., Greece, New Zealand, South Africa). 6 Delegations voted against (U.S.A., Byelorussia, Czechoslovakia, Ukraine, U.S.S.R., Yugoslavia). 2 Delegations abstained (France and India). Thereafter a vote was taken on the proposal by the U.S.A. Delegation which was supported by the Delegation of the U.S.S.R. that compensation should be to the extent of 25%. There were 6 votes in favour of this proposal (U.S.A., Byelorussia, Czechoslovakia, Ukraine, U.S.S.R., Yugoslavia) and 8 against (Australia, Canada, France, [Page 576] U.K., Greece, India, New Zealand, Union of South Africa). A vote was then taken on the proposal of the French Delegation that compensation should be to the extent of 75%. This proposal secured 8 votes (Australia, Canada, France, U.K., Greece, India, New Zealand, South Africa) against 6 (U.S.A., Byelorussia, Czechoslovakia, Ukraine, U.S.S.R., Yugoslavia). In view of the results of the voting, the Commission did not adopt any recommendation regarding extent of compensation.
The U.K. and Greek Delegations stated that their participation in the votes on the various proposals for 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 came before the Plenary Conference.
The Commission considered the text of paragraph 4 proposed by the
Delegation of the U.K. to be inserted in place of the proposal given in
the draft Peace Treaty with Finland. The text of this proposal is as
follows:
With regard to sub-paragraph (a), the Soviet Delegation suggested an amendment to the effect that the last sentence of sub-paragraph (a) should be altered to read as follows:
“In no event shall United Nation’s nationals, including those having ownership interests held directly or indirectly in corporations or associations, receive less favourable treatment with respect to compensation than that accorded Finnish nationals.”
When this amendment was put to the vote, there were 5 in favour and 9 against.
Sub-paragraph (a) of this proposal 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., Yugoslavia).
Sub-paragraphs (b), (c) and (d) of the proposal of the United States Delegation 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., Yugoslavia).
In regard to sub-paragraph (e), the French Delegation proposed an amendment as follows:
“The Finnish Government shall grant nationals of the United Nations an indemnity in Finnish marks sufficient to compensate, at the date of payment, the losses and damage due to the special measures applied to their property during the war, and which were not applicable to Finnish property.”
This amendment secured 8 votes in favour (Australia, Canada, France, U.K., Greece, India, New Zealand, South Africa) and 6 against (U.S.A., Byelorussia, Czechoslovakia, Ukraine, U.S.S.R. and Yugoslavia) and in consequence sub-paragraph (e) of the proposal of the U.K. Delegation was not put to the vote.
Article 25. The Commission unanimously adopted this Article subject to deletion in the French text of the words “qui ont été” before “transférés” so as to bring the French text into harmony with the Russian and English texts.
Article 26. The Commission unanimously adopted paragraphs 1 and 2 of this Article in the wording proposed in the draft Peace Treaty.
The U.K. proposal to delete paragraph 3 of this Article was put to the vote. 7 votes were cast in favour of deletion, 5 against with 2 abstentions.
Article 27. Article 27 of the draft Peace Treaty was adopted unanimously by the Commission in the wording proposed by the Council [Page 578] of Foreign Ministers with the proposal submitted by the Norwegian Delegation to paragraph 3 of this Article. In accordance with this amendment, the words: “which severed diplomatic relations with Finland and took action” were replaced by the words: “whose diplomatic relations with Finland have been broken off during the war and which took action”. Therefore paragraph 3 was accepted in the following wording: “Finland likewise waives all claims of the nature covered by paragraph 1 of this Article on behalf of the Finnish Government or Finnish nationals against any of the United Nations whose diplomatic relations with Finland have been broken off during the war and which took action in co-operation with the Allied and Associated Powers.”
Article 28. Paragraph 1 with sub-paragraphs (a) and (b) of this Article was adopted by the Commission unanimously in the wording proposed by the Council of Foreign Ministers.
The text of sub-paragraph (c) of this Article in the wording proposed by the U.S.S.R. Delegation secured 5 votes in favour and 9 against. When a vote was taken on the text of subparagraph (c) of paragraph 1 of this Article in the wording proposed by the U.K. Delegation, there were 9 votes in favour and 5 votes against.
The proposal of the U.K. Delegation on the subject of civil aviation was put to the vote in an amended text as follows:
“It is further understood that the foregoing provisions of paragraph (c) shall not apply to civil aviation, but that Finland 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 Finnish territory.”
Voting on this proposal resulted in 9 votes in favour and 5 against.
The French Delegation proposed to replace the above proposal by the following text:
“It is further understood that the foregoing provisions of paragraph (c) shall not apply to civil aviation, but that Finland 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 for obtaining international commercial aviation rights in Finnish territory, and will grant to any United Nation on a basis of reciprocity, and without discrimination, with regard to the operation of civil aircraft in international traffic, the right to fly over Finnish territory without landing and to make landings in Finnish territory for noncommercial purposes.”
This proposal of the French Delegation secured 7 votes in favour, 5 against and 2 abstentions.
With regard to paragraph 2 of Article 28, the text proposed by the U.S.S.R. Delegation secured 5 votes in favour with 9 against and the [Page 579] text proposed by the U.K. Delegation received 9 votes in favour with 5 votes against.
Article 29. On this Article the Commission did not take any recommendation as neither of the two proposals which are quoted in the Draft Peace Treaty, one proposed by the U.K. and the other by the U.S.S.R. Delegation, secured a majority of two-thirds of the votes. There were 9 votes (U.S.A., Australia, Canada, France, Greece, U.K., India, New Zealand, South Africa) in favour of and 5 votes (Byelorussia, Czechoslovakia, Ukraine, U.S.S.R., Yugoslavia) against the U.K. proposal. The proposal of the U.S.S.R. Delegation secured 5 votes in favour and 9 votes against.
Article 30. This Article was adopted unanimously by the Commission in the wording proposed by the Council of Foreign Ministers with the following proposal submitted by the Norwegian Delegation: that instead of the words “which have broken off diplomatic relations with Finland”, it should read “whose diplomatic relations with Finland have been broken off during the war.”
Therefore, Article 30 of the Draft Peace Treaty was adopted in the following wording:
“Articles 23, 24 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 Finland have been broken off during the war.”
Article 31. Article 31 was unanimously adopted in the wording proposed by the Council of Foreign Ministers.
Annex 4. Special Provisions Relating to Certain Kinds of Property
section a. industrial, literary and artistic property
1. The Commission unanimously recommends the adoption of paragraphs 1, 2, 3, 5, 6 and 8 of this section without alteration as set out in the draft Peace Treaty with Finland.
2. The Commission unanimously recommends the replacement of 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 Finland and its nationals, but nothing in these provisions shall entitle Finland or its nationals to more favourable treatment in the territory of any of the Allied or Associated Powers than is accorded by such Power in like cases to other United Nations or their nationals, nor shall Finland be required thereby to accord to any of the Allied or Associated Powers or its nationals more favourable treatment than Finland or its nationals receive in the territory of such Power in regard to the matters dealt with in the foregoing provisions.”
In view of the above, the Note by the U.S.S.R. Delegation which is contained in the draft Peace Treaty under this paragraph is now unnecessary.
3. The Commission unanimously recommends the adoption of paragraph 7 of Section [A] in the following wording:
“Finland 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 Finland have been broken off during the war and which undertake to extend to Finland the benefits accorded to Finland under Section A of this Annex.”
The unanimous adoption of this text by the Commission means that the Note of the U.S.S.R. Delegation in regard to it, as given in the text of the draft Peace Treaty, ceases to apply.
section b. insurances
The U.K. Delegation proposed the replacement of the wording given in the
draft Peace Treaty with Finland by a new text as follows:
The Commission did not make any recommendation on this subject as the proposal to include this section in the wording proposed by the U.K. Delegation secured 9 votes in favour and 5 votes against, whereas the proposal by the U.S.S.R. Delegation to omit Section B from the Treaty secured 5 votes in favour with 8 votes against and one abstention.
Annex 5. Contracts, Prescriptions and Negotiable Instruments
The Commission does not make any recommendation with regard to the inclusion of this Annex in the draft Treaty as none of the sections of this Annex secured a two-thirds majority.
i. contracts
The U.S.S.R. Delegation proposed to omit this section from the draft Peace Treaty. This proposal secured 5 votes in favour with 5 votes against and 4 abstentions. The U.K. Delegation proposed the inclusion in the draft Peace Treaty of a section dealing with contracts in the [Page 581] wording given in the draft Peace Treaty with Finland with an alteration of paragraph 1 of this Section. This proposal was submitted 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, 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 Peace Treaty a section on contracts with the amended text of paragraph 1 received 5 votes in favour with 7 against and 2 abstentions.
ii. periods of prescription
The U.S.S.R. Delegation proposed to insert into the Draft Peace Treaty a paragraph concerning periods of prescription worded as follows:
“1. All periods of prescription or limitation of rights of action in regard to mutual relations with reference to property between Finnish physical or juridical persons on the one hand, and United Nations physical or juridical persons on the other hand, irrespective or [of?] whether these periods commenced before or after the outbreak of war, shall be regarded as having been suspended in Finnish territory for the duration of the war on condition that the United Nation concerned will also, on condition 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 accepted:
- a)
- A Yugoslav Amendment to add after the words of the first line “rights of action” the words “or of undertaking an act or formality of conservation”;
- b)
- An amendment by the French Delegation to add after the words “with reference to” the words “persons and …”.
6 Delegations voted in favour of the U.S.S.R. proposal and 6 Delegations against, 2 Delegations abstained.
The U.K. Delegation proposed the inclusion in the Draft Peace Treaty with Finland of a section on prescriptions as worded in the [Page 582] draft Peace Treaty submitted with the addition of a paragraph 8 reading as follows:
“8. For the purposes 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 became unlawful”.
This proposal by the U.K. Delegation was supported by 6 delegations, 6 delegations voted against, and 2 delegations abstained.
iii. negotiable instruments
The U.S.S.R. Delegation proposed that no section on negotiable instruments should be included in the draft Peace Treaty. This proposal was supported by 5 Delegations, 7 Delegations voted against and 2 abstained.
The U.K. Delegation proposed the inclusion in the Peace Treaty with Finland of a section on negotiable instruments in the wording as set out in the draft Peace Treaty. This proposal was supported by 7 delegations, 5 delegations voted against, and 2 abstained.
iv. miscellaneous
The U.S.S.R. Delegation proposed that no such section should be included in the Peace Treaty, 6 delegations voted in favour of this proposal, 6 delegations voted against, and 2 abstained.
The U.K. Delegation proposed the inclusion in the Peace Treaty with Finland of a Section IV to Annex 5 in the wording as proposed by the U.K. Delegation and set forth in the draft Peace Treaty submitted. 6 votes were cast for this proposal, 6 delegations voted against and 2 delegations abstained.
Annex 6—Prize Courts and Judgments
- I.
- The Commission unanimously recommended the adoption of Section A (Prize Courts) without alteration.
- II.
- The Commission did not make any recommendations concerning the
text of Section B (Judgments) which had been submitted by the
Council of Foreign Ministers in two draftings.
- 1)
- The proposal of the U.S.S.R. Delegation obtained 7 votes, 5 Delegations voted against, and 2 Delegations abstained.
- 2)
- The proposal of the U.K. Delegation obtained 5 votes, 6 Delegations voted against, and 3 Delegations abstained.
Accordingly, the Commission submits for the consideration of the Conference:
- 1)
- the proposal of the U.S.S.R. Delegation which received 7 votes.
- 2)
- the proposal of the U.K. Delegation which received 5 votes.
Conclusions
This, Mr. Chairman, is a brief account of the work of our Commission and of the results achieved by it with regard to the Peace Treaty wih Finland.
I have the honour, on behalf of the Economic Commission for the Balkans and Finland, to submit the present Report to the Conference for its consideration, for the approval of our conclusions, and for the adoption of recommendations on those clauses regarding which the Commission was unable to reach a definite conclusion.
I would ask the Conference to approve the Commission’s recommendations to accept the following Articles approved by the Commission either unanimously or by a two-thirds majority or over.
- a)
- Articles and paragraphs of the Draft Treaty which were unanimously
approved without amendments
- Article 23 as a whole
- Article 24 paragraphs 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7 and 8
- Article 25 as a whole
- Article 26 paragraphs 1 and 2
- Article 27, paragraphs 1, 2, 4
- Article 28, paragraph 1, with sub-paragraphs “a” and “b”.
- Article 31 as a whole
- Annex 4 “A”, paragraphs 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 8
- Annex 6, Section “A”
- b)
- Modifications and additions to the Draft Treaty unanimously
adopted.
- Article 27, paragraph 3
- Article 30
- Annex 4 “A”, paragraphs 4 and 7
I would also ask the Conference to take a separate vote on the following provisions to which the Commission has not made any recommendations.
- Article 22—Reparation—proposal submitted by the Council of Foreign Ministers which obtained 9 votes to 4 with 1 abstention.
- Article 24—U.K. proposal of full compensation which received 6 votes to 6 with 2 abstentions.
- Article 24—Soviet proposal of a 25% compensation which received 6 votes to 8.
- Article 24—French proposal of a 75% compensation which received 8 votes to 6.
- Article 24—U.K. proposal for paragraph 4, sub-paragraphs a, b, c, d, which received 9 votes against 5.
- Article 24—paragraph 4, sub-paragraph “e” which received 8 votes to 6.
- Article 26—paragraph 3. The proposal of the U.K. Delegation for deletion of this paragraph which received 7 votes in favour, 5 against with 2 abstentions.
- Article 28—paragraph 1, sub-paragraph “c” in the wording submitted by the U.S.S.R. Delegation which received 5 votes to 9.
- Article 28—paragraph 1, sub-paragraph “c” in the drafting submitted by the U.K. Delegation which received 9 votes to 5.
- Article 28—U.K. proposal for the addition to sub-paragraph “c”, paragraph 1, of a provision on Civil Aviation which received 9 votes to 5.
- Article 28—French proposal for the addition to sub-paragraph “c”, paragraph 1, of a provision on Civil Aviation which received 7 votes to 5 and 2 abstentions.
- Article 28—paragraph 2 in the drafting submitted by the Soviet Delegation which received 5 votes to 9.
- Article 28—paragraph 2 in the drafting submitted by the U.K. Delegation which received 9 votes to 5.
- Article 29—in the drafting proposed by the U.K. Delegation which received 9 votes to 5.
- Article 29—in the drafting proposed by the U.S.S.R. Delegation which received 5 votes to 9.
- Annex 4, Section B—U.K. proposal which received 9 votes to 5.
- Annex 5, Section I—U.K. proposal which received 5 votes to 7 with 2 abstentions.
- Annex 5, Section II—in the drafting substituted 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—proposed by the U.K. Delegation which received 6 votes to 6 with 2 abstentions.
- Annex 6, Section B—proposal of the U.S.S.R. Delegation which received 7 votes to 5 with 2 abstentions.
- Annex 6, Section B—proposal of the U.K. Delegation which received 5 votes to 6 with 3 abstentions.