Jonathan Crane
Criticism and Skepticism
When the Czech Parliament passed a controversial church restitution bill into law in November 2012, it marked the end of a 20-year struggle between church and government on how best to compensate religious organizations for property seized by the former communist regime. Seen by many as the last phase of privatization after the Velvet Revolution, the legislation has attracted much criticism from a largely atheistic population, especially during this time of economic crisis.
President Václav Klaus showed his displeasure by neither signing nor vetoing the law, expressing his view that it would open the floodgates for other restitution claims prior to the 1948 cut-off date, notably those of the Sudeten Germans who were expelled after World War II. However, others are predicting a far bigger problem: that the churches don’t have the means to manage the unprecedented scale of their returns, and consequently, that the entire process could fall victim to corruption. “I’m a realist living in the Czech Republic,” said anti-graft campaigner Adriana Krnáčová. “I know what the quality of local administration is like, not to mention the culture that exists in our political establishment. So I would say the prospect that these financial transactions won’t be affected by corruption is impossible. I wish I could be convinced otherwise.”
The Terms of Legislation
Under the legislation, 17 churches and other religious groups will get back 56 percent of their land and property, valued at 75 billion Koruna ($3.75 billion), while the remaining real estate that cannot be returned in accordance with the law will be compensated to the tune of some 59 billion Koruna ($2.95 billion), spread over three decades. At the same time, the state will gradually reduce its 1.4 billion Koruna ($70 million) in annual subsidies to the church, currently used to pay clergy wages and maintain church buildings. While the subsidies are set to disappear in annual increments, it is estimated the properties to be returned generate as much as 4.5 billion Koruna ($225 million) every year. The Catholic Church stands to gain about 80 percent of the total.
The Process
According to the Culture Ministry, religious organizations will have one year to submit their requests, expected to number in the thousands, and must be able to prove the land or property belonged to them in the days immediately before the February 1948 communist coup. Given that records from the period were badly kept, many are wondering how it will even be possible for the different groups to compile an accurate list of what they owned. Throw into the mix more than 200,000 hectares (772 square miles) of land, comprising forests, farmland, and lakes (making the Catholic Church the country’s biggest landowner), combined with uncertainty regarding the real estate’s true market value, and this could be a recipe for disaster. “It’s a sort of voucher privatization for churches,” Krnáčová said. “The biggest risk I see is the churches surrendering either to private speculators or businessmen with access to public money. In these two cases, they would lose their property just like during the voucher privatization of the 1990s.” Catholic Monsignor Tomas Holub, secretary general of the Czech Bishops’ Conference, says all transactions will undergo two steps of control, with those worth more than 50,000 Koruna ($2,500)
needing approval from the economic councils of individual bishoprics. The Bishops’ Conference has also created a special commission to prepare and review proposals. Father Josef Hurt, who is used to looking after a small plot of land in his picturesque parish of Kryry, northwest Bohemia, wants to believe in the system. However, despite possessing basic knowledge of property management, the 48-year-old priest worries he and his colleagues lack the necessary support from above to handle the demands effectively.
Fears of Corruption
“We should definitely be concerned about this transfer of property, especially since the current government isn’t really trustworthy,” he said. “A brief glance at their conduct should serve as warning. The environment inside Parliament is corrupt, and we have to ask ourselves why these politicians agreed so easily to give church restitution the green light.” “Churches can never be ready for the administration of such an enormous amount of property,” added David Ondráčka, head of the Czech branch of Transparency International. “Inevitably, they will outsource some services by hiring external managers, lawyers, and advisers, which will then raise questions over the quality and transparency of that process. I can easily envisage a number of sharks who smell blood.”
In the meantime, all Father Hurt can do is stay positive, waiting to see what happens. “I would like to think of the restitutions as a chance,” he said. “Maybe we could invest in schools and charities. Some are even saying churches might be able to reap more from the land than its current private owners. With these finances, we could go a long way toward helping people in need.”
Edited excerpt reprinted with permission from Jonathan Crane, “Restitution Bill Leaves Church Leaders Struggling to Avoid the Corruption Trap,” The Prague Post, 2 January 2013.
Jonathan Crane is a staff writer for The Prague Post..