International legal regulation of the application of restitution as a form of material responsibility of states

Abstract

The article attempts to determine the principles of international legal regulation of the application of restitution as a form of material responsibility in international law, as restitution is a means of legal protection available to the claimant in the consideration of an international dispute, for which seized property is returned to the original owner in kind. The theoretical provisions regarding the international legal regulation of the application of restitution as one of the forms of material responsibility under international law have been analyzed, using the following sources – the UN International Law Commission (ILC); Article 35 of the Articles on State Responsibility of 2001; Permanent Court of International Justice (PCIJ) (predecessor of the UN International Court of Justice). Legal doctrine distinguishes two forms of restitution – restitution in kind («restitutio in integrum») and restoration («restitutio in pristinum»). Restitution in kind (restitutio in integrum) consists in restoring the former material situation. The second form of restitution – restoration (restitutio in pristinum) – is the restoration of immaterial rights. The issue of property restitution has been central to many political changes and peace agreements since the end of the Cold War. Restitution of property, homes, and land has been seen as a means of redressing past injustices in many forms, ranging from communist nationalization and colonial-era land confiscation to outright ethnic cleansing and war crimes. The politics of restitution often figure in broader transitional justice efforts following repression, persecution, and mass violations of human rights. Among the range of transitional justice mechanisms, restitution is most closely related to reparations, both because of their shared historical origins and because of their common desire to return victims to the conditions in which they would have been satisfied if their rights had not been violated. Practical examples of restitution that took place in the Czech Republic, South Africa, Bosnia and Guatemala were analyzed. Were studied the recommendations on how to better plan, organize and implement the restitution program in the conditions of the transition period, which were aptly described in his writings by the outstanding scientist Mr. Rhodri C. Williams [13].