Cablegate: Special Envoy and Austrian Mfa Legal Advisor

This record is a partial extract of the original cable. The full text of the original cable is not available.

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 02 VIENNA 000630

SIPDIS

SENSITIVE

STATE FOR EUR/OHI, EUR/AGS AND L/LEI

E.O. 12958: N/A
TAGS: KNAR PHUM PGOV AU
SUBJECT: SPECIAL ENVOY AND AUSTRIAN MFA LEGAL ADVISOR
DISCUSS HOLOCAUST AGREEMENT IMPLEMENTATION

REFS: A) 2005 VIENNA 3852 B) VIENNA 136

This message is sensitive but unclassified.

1. (U) INTRODUCTION: U.S. Special Envoy for Holocaust
Issues Edward B. O'Donnell met Austrian MFA Legal Advisor
Ferdinand Trauttmansdorff (successor to Austrian
Holocaust negotiator Hans Winkler, now MFA State
Secretary) on February 23 to exchange views on the

SIPDIS
remaining issues in implementation of the January 2001
Washington Agreement. O'Donnell first thanked
Trauttmansdorff for Austria's efforts to provide a
measure of justice for Holocaust victims, in particular
the nearly one billion dollars in restitution and
compensation that the GoA had made available through the
various funds. O'Donnell praised Chancellor Schuessel
for having moved quickly to proclaim legal peace after
dismissal of the final class-action suit (ref a).
Austria had also done the right thing recently by
accepting the judgment of the arbitration panel in the
Altmann case and agreeing to restitute the five Klimt
paintings (ref b). END INTRODUCTION.

GSF payouts
-----------

2. (SBU) O'Donnell noted that one fund, the General
Settlement Fund (GSF), had experienced long delays,
principally because of the lack of legal peace. There
were approximately 10,000 U.S. citizens who had filed
claims and were now hoping for expeditious settlements.
However, press reports were now emerging that placed the
settlement amounts in the range of 13-15% of the losses
(converted into today's dollars). O'Donnell said that
the U.S. had never anticipated that the ratio would be so
low; this was bound to cause problems with the victims'
groups.

3. (SBU) Trauttmansdorff conceded the need to pay more
attention to public affairs aspect of the GSF
settlements, now that they were underway. O'Donnell
recommended greater transparency: the letters going out
to recipients were couched in opaque legalese that would
be hard for many to understand. It might be better to
employ a simpler language that would clarify the
different basis for equity-based claims (based on loss of
income or education rather than property per se), for
insurance claims, etc.

4. (SBU) O'Donnell also noted that the interest accruing
to the $210 million fund could be the source of an
additional special payment, possibly to Holocaust
survivors among the 19,000 claimants who could be
identified.

Curran professional liability policy
------------------------------------

5. (SBU) Trauttmansdorff then raised the problem of
professional liability insurance for the U.S.-nominated
GSF panel member, Dr. Vivian Curran. The GoA had looked
into the matter and proposed a policy that would cover
legal fees to defend against a possible suit. Curran had
responded this was insufficient; the policy must also
cover the amount of any eventual judgment.
Trauttmansdorff said he had written to John Bellinger
(Bureau of Legal Affairs, L) seeking advice. He had also
asked GSF panel chairman Frank Berman to look into a UK-
based policy.

6. (SBU) O'Donnell said that the Office of Holocaust
Issues and L were also checking into the insurance policy
carried by the International Commission on Holocaust Era
Insurance Claims (ICHEIC) to see if it might be a model
for this situation. In any case, the U.S. considered
this coverage to be Austria's responsibility as part of
the administrative costs of the GSF. Trauttmansdorff did
not argue the point, but said that is would be in the
spirit of the 2001 Washington Agreement if the U.S. did
not leave the GoA "alone and exposed to the U.S. legal
system." O'Donnell said that the State Department would
continue to work with Professor Curran and the GOA to
identify a suitable insurance policy that would meet her
needs so that she can continue to provide her expertise
to reviewing claims.

ICHEIC claims
-------------

7. (SBU) O'Donnell raised the issue of GSF denial of
claims for policies issued by the Prague office of Anker,
citing the language of the 2001 Washington agreement and
a subsequent (2003) agreement between ICHEIC and the GSF.
Both of these tended to indicate that the treatment of
insurance claims was an exception to the general
principle that the GSF would address injustices committed
on the territory of the present-day Austria.
Trauttmansdorff said that he would look more intensively
into the matter. It was certainly a question of law. As
a practical matter, however, there seemed to be very few
such cases. The same seemed to apply to other questions
regarding the different filing deadlines for the GSF and
ICHEIC and differing valuations of certain policies.
Trauttmansdorff said it was up to National Fund Secretary
General Lessing to explain to the GSF board how the Fund
sees these issues; he would try to see that it came up at
the March GSF Board meeting.

McCAW

© Scoop Media