A declaration entitled "On the Crimes of Communist Regime of the Soviet Union in Estonia", initiated by 33 Estonian parlamentarians, failed to gain a passing vote last summer in Estonia.

It was a serious disappointment by all who agree with legal scholar Enn Sarv who states: "The Communist Party and the Soviet occupation powers had for a half century done all possible to break the backbone of the Estonian people and weaken their viability."

Prof. Sarv has thoroughly researched the brutality with which the totalitarian forces committed crimes in Estonia. He emphasized that ten years was sufficient time in independent Estonia to declare at the state level a condemnation of Soviet genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes and also to proclaim the specific government organs involved as criminal in nature.(Estonia regained its independence in August of 1991).

In reference to international law it was expected that individuals involved in the crimes would not escape from personal responsibility based on elapsed years or high governmental position. Such offences internationally are considered most serious in scale and bypassing imperative norms is deemed unacceptable. It is widely accepted that a statute of limitations in these cases does not apply.

Other mitigating factors such as difficulty in obtaining accurate and authentic evidence, and the size of republic hinders successful prosecutions. That is why the most stringent scrutiny of evidence is necessary in bringing criminal actions to court and in strictly adhering to the civil rights of the accused.

The failed parliamentary declaration emphasizes "individual responsibility for the regime's criminality is not determined by his/her membership in certain establishments or organizations (NKVD, MKGB, KGB etc.), but rather by his/her own activity, the ethical evaluation of which the individual must personally provide. Judgements regarding the individual's participation in genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes shall be passed by the courts."

It was not, however, the intention of the declaration's initiators to target specific individuals in positions of authority during the occupation. In spite of this, cynical critics have accused the resolution's initiators of politically convenient moral indignation, of wanting to gain political advantage by evoking memories of a dark past and, prior to the presidential elections last fall, by indirectly painting red with a wide brush, the candidates who formerly belonged to the Communist party.

Lithuania's experience indicates otherwise. The Lithuanian parliament passed a similar resolution in December 1998.

Algirdas Brazauskas, a former first secretary of his country's Communist party, is currently prime minister.

However, Russia, the legal successor to the Soviet Union, does not recognize the state crimes committed during the years 1940?1991, nor does it acknowledge that it illegally occupied and annexed Estonia in 1940. It's with this in mind that the supporters of the declaration consider its acceptance crucial.

An International Congress, in Vilnius in the summer of 2000, on the "Evaluation of the Crimes of Communism" adopted a resolution which, amongst other details, states: "It is essential for citizens throughout the world to take an active part in eliminating the preconditions for this (sic) type of crimes, without relinquishing to oblivion a single instance of destruction of people and nations. Although the extent of the crimes perpetrated by the communist regimes is significantly greater than that of those perpetrated by Nazism, the harm inflicted by them on mankind has not yet been evaluated on an international level, however. The crimes of Nazism have been evaluated, the biggest Nazi criminals have been convicted and their other handymen have been punished. This has not been done, however, with respect to Communist criminals - they not only have not been tried, but have not been named at all it is essential to make a social, political and legal evaluation of the criminal actions perpetrated by Communism and communist regimes."

It must be noted that a few recent indictments have been brought against former NKVD officials of secondary importance in the Baltic. The process has been arduous. Some aged accused have died during lengthy pretrial investigations. Others have received nominal sentences.

Moscow is predictably indignant.

Lennart Meri, as the previous president, has often gone on record in reminding Estonians of the country's tragic history, the casualties of repression and in choosing an appropriate time to forgive the guilty,because without this, the past may overshadow the future.

A vexing dilemma still remains: who and how to forgive if the regime committing the crimes has not been officially accused? A parliamentary assessment would demonstrate to the world and to Russia, Estonia's willingness to turn a page in history.

LAAS LEIVAT

Eestlased Kanadas

TRENDING