1 avenue du Président Robert SchumanCS 30403 F - 67001 Strasbourg Cedex
T. + 33 (0)3 88 17 23 13 F. + 33 (0)3 88 17 90 62
www.ombudsman.europa.eu [email protected]
European Ombudsman
Directorate A Registry
Strasbourg, 30/10/2012 Acknowledgement of receipt
Dear Sir/Dear Madam,
I am writing to let you know that your complaint dated 22/10/2012 reached the Office of the European Ombudsman on 23/10/2012 and was assigned registration number 2117/2012/LP. It will be dealt with by Mr Lambros Papadias (tel: +33 (0)3.88.16.49.15).
Enclosed, please find an information note concerning the treatment of your complaint and the rules governing the protection of personal data which the Ombudsman applies when dealing with complaints.
Your complaint will first be examined to determine if it falls within the Institutionʹs mandate. If it does not, I shall inform you accordingly. If it does, the Ombudsman will write to you.
I would also like to draw your attention to the fact that complaints submitted to the Ombudsman do not affect time limits for appeals in any administrative or judicial proceedings (Article 2(6) of the Statute of the European Ombudsman).
Yours sincerely,
Peter Bonnor
Head of the Registry
Jonathan [email protected]
IN RE: VATICAN FINANCIAL AUTHORITY
2
Information note
Once your complaint has been registered, the Ombudsmanʹs services will examine if it is within the Institutionʹs mandate. If it is, the Ombudsman will decide if it meets the admissibility criteria set out in the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union and the Statute of the European Ombudsman. He will then decide whether there are sufficient grounds to justify opening an inquiry into your complaint. Under normal circumstances, you will be informed of the findings oncerning these matters within one month.
When the Ombudsman decides to open an inquiry, he sends the complaint to the EU institution, body, office or agency in question and asks for its opinion. If the Ombudsman decides that there are insufficient grounds to open an inquiry into a complaint, he may also send his decision to the institution concerned, with the complainantʹs name and contact details removed. He will not do this, however, if, within two weeks of receiving this acknowledgement of receipt, the complainant expressly objects to such a course of action.
Complaints to the Ombudsman (and any annexed documents) are normally dealt with publicly. This means that any member of the public may have access to the complaint and its annexes. If the Ombudsman opens an inquiry, the opinion of the institution concerned by the complaint, any observations on the opinion made by the complainant, as well as all other documents in the complaint file are, in principle, public documents, to which any member of the public may have access upon request.
However, a complainant has the right to request that his or her complaint be dealt with confidentially. Such a request can be made or withdrawn at any time. If confidentiality is requested, there is no public access to the complaint or to any other documents in the complaint file. However, even a confidential complaint is sent to the institution concerned if the Ombudsman opens an inquiry.
The European Ombudsman aims to be transparent and proactive in disseminating information about his work. Therefore, when he decides to open an inquiry into a complaint, whether confidential or not, he will publish, on a specific page of his website, a short description of the subject matter and the allegations and claims taken up for inquiry. This will be done without disclosing the identity of the complainant. The Ombudsmanʹs decisions, whether dealt with publicly or confidentially, will also be published on his website and may be referred to in his Annual Report in an anonymised form.
A complaint to the Ombudsman may contain personal data relating to the complainant or to a third party. The processing of personal data by the Ombudsman is governed by Regulation (EC) No 45/20011. Unless the complainant requests confidentiality, he or she is understood to consent, for the purposes of Article 5(d) of Regulation (EC) No 45/2001, to the Ombudsmanʹs dealing publicly with any personal data which the complaint may contain.
1 Regulation (EC) No 45/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 December 2000 on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data by the Community institutions and bodies and on the free movement of such data, OJ 2001 L 8, p.1.
Complaint form
Complaint about maladministration
Complaint submitted on: 22 October 2012
European Ombudsman
First name: Dr. Jonathan
Surname: Levy (Solicitor, England)
On behalf of (if applicable):
Holocaust Victims and organizations in Sweden,
UK, Bosnia, Serbia, Croatia, and the United States
Address line 1: 37 Royal Pointe Dr.
Address line 2:
Town/City: Hilton Head
County/State/Province: South Carolina
Postcode: 29926
Country: United States
Tel.: +1 8438378413
Fax: +1 2023182406
E-mail address: [email protected]
Against which European Union (EU) institution or body do you wish to
complain?
European Commission
What is the decision or matter about which you complain? When did you become aware of it? Add annexes if necessary.
Prelude to Complaint of Maladministration by the European Commission
On July 21, 2010, as a solicitor (England) we wrote on behalf of our clients
including Swedish and UK citizens to the European Central Bank regarding
a complaint about the Vatican Bank also known as the Institute for Religious
Page 1 of 5European Ombudsman»At your service - Complaint form
10/22/2012https://secure.ombudsman.europa.eu/atyourservice/secured/complaintform/...
Works pursuant to the Monetary Agreement between the European Union
and The Vatican City State – Attachment One.
On September 23, 2010, the European Central Bank referred this matter to the
European Commission – Attachment Two.
On October 20, 2010, we wrote to the EU Commissioner as a solicitor
(England) on behalf of our clients regarding the The Monetary Agreement
between the European Union and The Vatican City State – Attachment
Three.
On or About November 15, 2010, we received a partial response from the
European Commission that referred the money laundering matter to a
Vatican Authority due to be operable January 1, 2011 – Attachment Four.
On November 17, 2010, we sought clarification from the European
Commission Attachment Five.
On or about December 17, 2010, the European Commission clarified that it
may take legal action if the Vatican Authority did not comply with the
Monetary Agreement between the European Union and The Vatican City
State – Attachment Six.
On July 2, 2011, as solicitor (England) for multiple clients including EU
residents in the UK and Sweden, a complaint detailing money laundering
allegation under the Monetary Agreement between the European Union and
The Vatican City State was written to the Vatican Financial Authority –
Attachment Seven.
On September 24, 2011, a follow up letter was sent to the Vatican Financial
Authority about the Monetary Agreement between the European Union and
The Vatican City State Attachment Eight.
Maladministration by EU Commission
On November 28, 2011, a letter was written to the EU Commission regarding
the inaction and failure to communicate by the Vatican Authority and
requesting the EU Commission use its good offices and take appropriate
action under the Monetary Agreement between the European Union and The
Vatican City State – Attachment Nine
On December 8, 2011, the EU Commission responded by informing the
complainant that it was not obligated to do anything because Complaint or
his clients were not persons described under Directive 2005156/EC –
Attachment Ten.
On February 10, 2012, the EU Commission was informed that it had erred
and that the solicitorcomplainant was a person described under Directive
2005/60//EC Article 2(1)(3)(b) which specifies that independent legal
professionals in the exercise of their activities that are acting on behalf of and
for their client in any financial transaction are obliged to report money
laundering to the member state FIU which is the VAIF for transactions
within or involving entities of the Vatican City State Attachment Eleven.
Page 2 of 5European Ombudsman»At your service - Complaint form
10/22/2012https://secure.ombudsman.europa.eu/atyourservice/secured/complaintform/...
On or about March 13, 2012, the EU Commission responded in part by
indicating that it still would not take action under Directive 2005/60/EC
because the Vatican Bank belonged to the Holy See and not the Vatican City
State and therefore was exempt from Directive 2005/60/EC Attachment
Twelve.
On May 28, 2012, solicitorcomplainant on behalf of his clients including EU
residents responded to the EU Commission with documentary evidencing
indicating the Vatican Bank was created under the laws of the Vatican City
State was a Vatican City State entity – Attachment Thirteen.
On September 21, 2012, the solicitorcomplainant on behalf of his client wrote
a follow up letter to the European Commission requesting that the EU
Commission admitted that the Vatican was subject to Directive 2005/60/EC
and if the Vatican Financial Authority did not act in good faith and therefore
the EU Commission could take action – Attachment 14.
When the Vatican Authority ignored communications from Complainant, the
EU Commission did not act in good faith.
First it erroneously claimed complainant was not a person described under
Directive 2005/60/EC and therefore his complaints about money laundering
could be ignored.
Second, when it was pointed out that the EU Commission’s determination
was in error, the EU Commission then raised a second objection that the
Vatican Bank was not a Vatican City State entity.
Third, when the complainant submitted evidence from Vatican City’s lawyer
and expert to the contrary, the EU Commission refused to correspond with
the Complainant further.
Name Size Content type
1.pdf 671955 application/pdf
3.pdf 1212430 application/pdf
2.pdf 477836 application/pdf
4.pdf 222685 application/pdf
5.pdf 290944 application/pdf
6.pdf 651561 application/pdf
7.pdf 1029789 application/pdf
8.pdf 555946 application/pdf
9.pdf 3016199 application/pdf
10.pdf 614432 application/pdf
11.pdf 1820113 application/pdf
12.pdf 178561 application/pdf
13.pdf 3020617 application/pdf
13.pdf 3020617 application/pdf
Page 3 of 5European Ombudsman»At your service - Complaint form
10/22/2012https://secure.ombudsman.europa.eu/atyourservice/secured/complaintform/...
Name Size Content type
14.pdf 399708 application/pdf
What do you consider that the EU institution or body has done wrong?
The European Commission has behaved in an arbitrary and capricious
manner in its treatment of Holocaust survivors and organization and has
erred in favor of the Vatican City State.
What, in your view, should the institution or body do to put things right?
First, the EU Commission should answer the May 28, 2012 correspondence
from Complainant and then assist Complainant in holding the Vatican City
State’s Vatican Authority and Vatican Bank to the terms of the Monetary
Agreement between the European Union and The Vatican City State which
incorporates the anti money laundering provisions of Directive 2005/60/EC
in regards to the complaint against the Vatican bank by the Holocaust
survivors and organizations.
Have you already contacted the EU institution or body concerned in order to obtain redress?
Yes (please specify)
Yes, see the attached Exhibits. The EU Commission when contacted with
material points of law and fact by the complainant simply refused to respond
on directly on several occassions.
If the complaint concerns work relationships with the EU institutions and bodies: have you used all the possibilities for internal administrative requests and complaints provided for in the Staff
Regulations? If so, have the time limits for replies by the institutions already expired?
Not applicable
Has the object of your complaint already been settled by a court or is it pending before a court?
No
There is no pending court action not court ruling on the matter of the the
Monetary Agreement between the European Union and The Vatican City
State and Holocaust victimsʹ claims.
Please select one of the following two options after having read the
information in the box below:
Please treat my complaint publicly
Page 4 of 5European Ombudsman»At your service - Complaint form
10/22/2012https://secure.ombudsman.europa.eu/atyourservice/secured/complaintform/...
% o you agree tha t your compla in t may be pas s ed on to ano ther ins titu tion o r body & European or na tiona l' ( if the European Ombuds man
dec ides tha t he is not en titled to dea l ) ith it *
Yes
1( avenue du Pr + s iden t , obe rt - chuman
C- 304 03
/ - 0 1 001 - tras bourg Cede 2
3 . 4 33 & 0 ' 3 5 5 1 1 23 13
/ . 4 33 & 0 ' 3 5 5 1 1 6 0 0 2) ) ) .ombuds man.eu ropa .eu
Page 5 of 5European Ombudsman»At your service - Complaint form
10/22/2012https://secure.ombudsman.europa.eu/atyourservice/secured/complaintform/...
BRIMSToNE & CO.ATTORNEYS & SOLICITORS
I629 K STREET N\iv SUITE gOOWASHINGTON DC 20006 USA
lEutFAx l-2O2'31&2&[email protected]
YVYYW.BRIMSTONEANDCOMPANY.COM
July l, 2010
European Cenhal BankThe Goveming CouncilKaisershasse 296031 I Frankturt am MainGermany
Re: Vatican Money Laundering of Nazi Gold &Use of Con€entration Camp Victim Gold to Mint Vaticrn Euros
Dear President Trichet:
This is a communication to the European Cenhal Bank by Holocdust Survivo$represented by this firm. The Holocaust Survivors request an investigation ofthewell founded allegations of money laundering and retention of Second World Warera concentration camp loot by the Vatican Bank, a selfdesffibed organ ofthe The
Holy See located in Th€ Vatican City State. Additionally, the Holocaust Survivorsrequest an accounting ofconc€ntration camp and victim gold in the possession of
the Vatican Bank and/or present in the Vatican City State or controlled by the
Holy See that may have been used to mint Vatican Euro coins or to providefinancing for their minting.
The ECB has jurisdiction ov€r this matter pursuant to Article 8 of The MonetaryAgreement between the Ewopean {Jnion and The Vatican City State and moresplcifically at Art. 8(l)(b). The EU-Vatican Monetary Agr€ement Annex firther
incorporatis by reference Directive 2005/60/EC ofthe European Parliament and ofthe Council of26 October 2005 on the prevention ofthe use ofthe financialsystem for the purpose ofmoney laundering and terrorist financing' OJ L 309'25.11.2005, p.l5 36, and amended by Directive 2008/20lEC ofthe ErropeanParliament and ofthe Cormcil of l1 March 2008 on the prwention ofthe use of
the firancial system for the purpose ofmoney laundering and terrorist fnancing,as regards the implementing powers conferred on the Commission ' OJ L 76'lg3r0l8, p. 4@7. Therefore, we believe that these allegations fall under theauspices ofthe ECB or an EU organization designated by the ECB.
We represent Holocaust Survivors and organizations including Mileva Reljanovic'a citizen of Sweden, and 25 other individuals representing Holocaust Survivors
ATTORNEYS, SOIJCITOR!', BARRISTEF9 AND ADI'OCATES, PRIMARY LTCENSES
Wa9HINGToN' DC & NlGEFla
BR|MSTToNE & Co.ATTORNEYS & SOIJCITORS| 629 K STREET NW surrE 3OoWASHINGTON DC 2(X)O6 USA
T ELrl F ̂ x 1 -20.2'3 | f}'[email protected]
YVYVW.BRIMSTONEANDCOMPANY.COM
from th€ United States. Serbia and ukraine and The Independent Council ofSerbian Roma, The JasenoYac Research Institute, The Republic of Serbian Krajina
in Exile, and three other organizations who were all plaintiffs in the lawsuitAlperin v. Vatican Bank.
In 1999, the Vatican Bank's then president, Angelo Caloi4 was contacted by
Holocaust Survivors conceming the 1998 United States State DepartmentEizenstaVslany Report entitled (lS. Concerns About the Fate ofthe 'yartimeustqshtz Treasury which concluded there was evidence pointing to Vaticaninvolvement in laundering concenhation camp loot. The Vatican Bank howeverdid not answer Holocaust survivors and litigation in the United States DistrictCourt for the Northem District of Califomia ensued' The Vatican Bank was
eventually found by the court to be an organ ofThe Holy See and thereforeimmune ftom lawsuit in the United States because there was no eiidence that the
Ustasha gold conholled by the Vatican Bank was still in the United States' This
finding was upheld by the Ninth Circuit Court ofAppeals in San Francisco and
became final in March 2010.
The Vatican Bank never denied the charges ofmoney laundering or accounted for
the conc€ntration camp gold it was accused of receiving' Plaintiffs produced
volumes ofdeclassihed documents and the transcript ofthe four day deposition of
former US Army Counter Intelligence Special Agent, William Gowen, whoinvestigated the Ustasha Treasury in Rome h 1946-1947 araong other evidence'
N4r. Gowen, who resides in New York City, testified under oath that a l0 truck
convoy ofvaluables including concentration camp gold was received at the
Vatican Bank in 1946. The value ofthis loot was estimated to be worth $50million by US Treasury Agent Emerson Bigelow who also reportedcontemporaneously to his superiors in Washington about th€ incident'
Holocaust Suwivors are concerned about the following:
l. Gold Vatican Euro coins may contain dental and victim gold fromconcentration camp victims in former Yugoslavia.
2. Valuables from the Ustasha Treasury or the proceeds ofsame may have been
used by the Vatican City State though accounts at the Vatican Bank to pay for
minting of Vatican Ewo denominated coins.
ATIORNEYS. SOL!CrfORS, BARRISTERS AND AI'YOCATESI FRIMARY LICENgE:IS
I/VaSH|NGToN' DC & NIGERIA
BRIMSTONE & CO.ATTORNEYS & SOLICITORS
| 629 K SIREET Nw sulrE 3ooWASHINGTON DC 200()6 USA
TEL.IFAX l'2O2'31&[email protected]
YVWW.BRIMSTONEANDCOMPANY.COM
3. The Vatican Bank has refused to cooperate in any investigation oflaunderingthe Ustasha Treasury, refused to enter a denial to the allegations ofmoneylaundering and chose instead to invoke sovereign immunity in the United States
Courts.
The Vatican City State and the state owned or operated frnancial institutionstherein by entering into t!rc The Monetary Agreement between the EuroPeanUnion aid The l/;tican city State have specifically placed themselves under ECBjurisdiction and have waived their sovereign immunity in exchang€ for the right to
coin Euro cunency.
Holocaust Survivors request the ECB designate an investigatory committee or
agency to which Holocaust Survivors may submit thefu evidence and that the
Vatican Bank and Vatican City State be required to cooperate in the investigation'
Respecttu[ysubmined. a.$'#:::.at, r . \ \ =
( r^,S(.^-) -"-.J Zri;.t-LoxS\ vr\rP .,.,am,N
r. Jonathan LetTAttomey & Solicitor for Holocaust Survivors
ATToRNEYS. soucrToRs, EARRISTERE aND ADvocATEs' PRIMARY llcENsEsvvasHtNGToN. DC & NtGERtA
@C E N T R A I
Dear Dr. Levy,
Upon receipt ofyour letter dated 30 August 2010, I heve been informed that my letter ofreply to your
original letter dated I July 2010 was never sent due to an administrative mistake l d€eply apologise for
the inconvenience caused and attach my original reply.
Antonio Sdinz de Vicuf,a
Director Ceneral Legal Services
E U R O P E A N A A N K
E U R O S Y S T E M
Anronio sAtNz DE vtculilA
Dr. Jonathan LevyBrimstone & CoAttomeys & Solicitors1629 K Street NW Suite 300Washington DC 20006USA 23 SEPTEMBER20IO
Yours sincerely,
E U R O F E A
@N C E N T
E U R O S Y S T E I ' I
Anronio sAlNz DE vICUNA
Dr. Jonathan LevyBrimstone & CoAtlorneys & Solicitors1629 K Street NW Suite 300Washinglon DC 20006USA
Dear Dr. Levy,
Thank you for your leter dated I J(ty 2010 addressed to the EuropeaD Central Bank' Please note that
rhe Monetary Agreement betweeD the European Union (EU) and the Vatican City State ol ' I7 DeceDber
2009 (the "EU-Vatican Monelary Agreement") was entered into by the EU pursuant to Art icle 219(l) of
the Treaty on the Furctioning of European Union (TFEU) Under this provision the EU Courci l ' acting
o,r a recontntendrltioD liom the European cornmission. and after consulting the European central Bank
(ECB). deoides the arrangelnents for the negotiation and co|lclusion of monetary agreements with third
Stales. In the case ofthe EU-Vatican Monetary Agrecmelt, the position to be taken by the EU regarding
the reDegotiatiorr of this AgreemeDt was set oul in an EU Council Decision of 26 November 2009 '
Article 3 of this Decision clarifies that the negotiations with the vatican city state were required to be
conducted by the ltal ian Republic and the European CommissioD on behalfofthe EU, that the ECB was
required lo be fully associated with the negotiations, but that the ECB's agreement was req ired only on
those issues lal l ing within the ECB's f ields ofcompetence ConsisteDt with this mandate, Mr' Joaquin
Alrnunia. l.or.rner Member ofthe European commission responsible for Economic and Monetary Affairs,
sigDed the EU-Valican Monetary Agreement for the EU. The Eu-Vatican Monetary Agreement also
specifies that the EU is represented by the European Commissior and by the ltalian Republic'
Regarding the ECB's fields of competence under the Eu-Vatican Monetary Agreement' while the ECB
has an exclusive competence to aulhorise the issue of euro banknotes within the EU, the ECB'S
competences in the area oieuro coirls is more restricted ln accordance with Article 128(2) TFEU n is
the EU Member Sfates, which issue euro coins, subject to the approval by the ECB's Coverning Council
ofthe volume ofthe issuance. It is the EU Council, on a proposal from the European Commission' and
aga inon lya l i e rconsu l t i ng theECB 'wh ichadop tsmeasures toha rmon ise thedenomina t i onsand
lechnical specificatioDs of all coins intended for circulation to the exlent necessary to permit their
smooth circulation within the EU. This narrow competence ofthe EcB with respect to cornage matters
under EU law is directly reflected in the provisions ofthe Eu_Vatican Monetary Agreement, Article 6 of
c o u n c i l D c c i s i o n o f 2 6 N o v € m b e l 2 0 0 9 o n t h e p o s i t i o n t o b e l a k e n b } l h e E u r o p e a n C o m m u n i t y r c g a r d j n g $ erh. v'ii.an aitu sr're Official Journal of the l-lurooean Union. L 321,
which requires that the volume of euro coins issued by the Vatican City State will be added to the
volume ofcoins issued by Italy for the purposes ofthe ECB approval ofthe total volume ofthe issue by
that Member State in accordance with Article l2E(2) TFEU.
You also make reference in your lefter to Article 8(l) of the Eu_Vatican Monetary Agreement Under
this provision the Vatican City State undertakes to adopt all appropriate measures, through direct
transpositions or possibly equivalent actions, with a view to implementing the EU legal acts and rules
listed in the Annex to the Agreement, in the field of: (a) euro banknotes and coins; and (b) prevention of
money laundering, prevention of fraud and counterfeiting of cash and non-cash means of payment,
medals and tokens and statistical reporting requirements Article 8(3) further clarifies that the Annex
will be amended annually by the Commission. Th€ Comrnission's role in this particular respect
complements the Commission's general legislative role under the EU Treaties
Against this background, we suggest that you refer this matter to the cabinet of the Member of the
Commission responsible for Economic and Monetary Affairs for further consideration
Antonio Seinz de Vicufia
Director Ceneral Legal Servic€s
Yours sincerely,
BRIMSTONE & CO.ATTORNEYS & SOLICITORS
I 629 K STREET NW SU]TE 8OOWASHINGTON DC 20006 USA
TELlFax l'2o2'3l [email protected]!.vw.BRIMSTONE:ANDCOMPANY.COM
October 20, 2010
Commissioner Olli RehnEuropean CommissionDirectorate General for Economic and Financial AffairsB-1049 BrusselsBelgium
Fax: (+32)2 29 809 98
Via Fax and Mail
In re: Holocaust Victim Gold and the EuAy'atican Monetary Agreement
Dear Commissioner Rehn:
We represent Dr. Milan Bates of the United Kingdom who is legal successorin interest to Serbian Holocaust survivor Nadezda Bates and we alsorepresent Swedish citizen and Holocaust survivor, Mileva Reljanovic bom in1930. We further represent several Serbian organizations representingmembers wilh an interest in this issue: The Republik Srpska Krajina inExile, the Independent Council of Serbian Roma, and The JasenovacMemorial Center. Outside Europe, we represent Holocaust survivors andtheir heirs in the United States and Serbia.
We are writing to you at the direction of Mr. Antonio S6inz de Vicuia' theDirector General oflegal Services for the European Cental Bank in regardsto our initial request ofJuly 1, 2010 for an inquiry into Euro coinage policiesby the Vatican City State. Please see atlached correspondence and resultinglegal opinion by Mr. S6inz de Vicufia on behalfofthe European CentralBank herein incorporated by reference and attachment.
This request includes the Vatican's complete failure to account forHolocaust related assets in it possession as being inimical with the curent
ATTORNEYS. SOUCTTORS. BARRISTERS AND ADVOC./\TES' PRII,IARY LICEN5EWASHINGTON, DC
BRIMSTONE & CO.ATTORNETS & SOLICITORS
| 629 K STREET trlw sulrE 3oor,iVASHINGTON DC 20006 USA
lEu/Fax l -202"31&[email protected]\/VTVW.BRI M5TONEANDCOMPANY.COM
EU Vatican Monetary Agreement of 20 1 0 (20l0lc 28105). We specificallyinvoke Article 8 ofthe Agreement which states:
Article 8
I. The Vatican City State shall undertake to adopt all appropriate measures,through direct transpositions or possibly equivalent actiorts, with a view toimplementing the EIJ legal ac* and rules listed in the Annex to thisAgreement, in the field of:
(a) euro banknotes and coins,
ft) prevention ofmoney laundering, prevention offraud and counterfeitingofcash and non-cash means ofpayment, medals and tokens and statisticalr ep or t ing / e q uire me nt s.
This request for an investigation and inquiry deals with the unresolved issueof the "Ustasha Treasury" and the missing gold and other valuables fromformer Yugoslavia first documented by the 1998 United States StateDepartment Eizenstat/Slany Report entitled Concerns About the Fate oftheWartime tJstasha Treasury which concluded that there was evidencepointing to Vatican involvement in larmdering concentmtion camp gold andloot after the Second World War.
This gold bullion, silver, and other valuables are victim property looted fromSerbs, Roma, and Jews which has never been accor'rnted for by the Vaticandespite numerous demands including our own lawsuit in the United Statesagainst the Vatican Bank (Institute for Religious Works). Dr. Bates, Ms.Relijanovic and the other victims suffered losses of family property to theUstasha including gold, silver, banknotes andjewelry \thich was looted bythe Ustasha and eventually deposited at the Vatican in 1946 and has beenunaccounted for since.
For examole:
AIToRNEYs. SoLtcIfoRS. BARRISTER5 AND ADYoCATES' PRIMARY LlcENaEWASHINGTON' DC
BRIMSTONE & CO.ATTORNEYS & SOLICITORS
t 629 K STREET NwsulrE 3ooWASHINGTON DC 200()6 USA
, lEL/Fax l-20a3le-24o6INFO@BRIMSTONEANDCOMPANY.COMWYYW.BRIMSTONEANDCOMPANY.COM
Nadezda Bates was bom in Bihac, Bosnia, Kingdom ofYugoslavia in 1923.Plaintiffs father, Janko Bates, was a wealthy Serb businessman in Bihac andowned an establishment named Kafana Beograd- The Bates family ownednumerous other properties tbrough out the region and had accumulated agreat deal of wealth including an opulently firmished home and jewelryincluding one dozen hand made bracelets of 18 carat gold with sapphires anddiamonds and three necklaces made in the same fashion with dark sapphires,twenty rings made of l8 carat gold, hundreds of gold ducats, and many itemsoflesser value. They also possessed a quantity ofcash and a large stock offood and drink used in their trade. On Jme 23, 1941 agents ofthe UstashaRegime entered into Bihac and arrested the Serb and Jewish inhabitants'Plaintiffwitnessed the well organized pillaging and plundering of the Batesfamily property and Jewish properties in the neighborhood by the UstashaRegime's agents. Teams of special soldiers with trucks conducted thelooting operation in a thorough manner. The Ustasha soldiers herded theSerbs and Jews into the changing rooms at tle Bihac sports grounds, wherethey were thoroughly searched relieved ofany concealed valuables' Plaintiffand her family was transported to Kmjeusa by the Ustasha where her fatherand brother were murdered by Ustasha armed forces under the command ofthe Ustasha Govemor of Bihac, Ljubomir Kvatemik'..
Dr. Milan Bates is a resident of the United Kingdom and is legal heir tothese claims on behalfofthe Bates family and demands an accounting oftheir share ofgold in the Ustasha Treasury estimated to worth 40 ounces andthe family jewelry worth in excess of$100,000.
Mileva Reljanovic (Vujcic) was bom in 1930 in Vojskova, Bosni4 KingdomofYugoslavia and crmently resides in Sweden. In 1942 the UstashaRegime's agents forcibly removed all Serbs from Vojskova in order to"colonize" the region. The village store and its contents owned by plaintiffsfamily was seized and the Serb residents ofthe town terrorized byrampaging Ustasha armed forces who killed and raped indiscriminatelyarnong the Serbs. The store and its contents were converted to cash by theUstasha Regime's Ministry ofColonization and the proceeds added to theUstasha Treasury. Plaintiff and her family memben were sent 1o Jasenovac
AITORNEYS, SOLICTTOR9, BARRISTERS AND AD.\'OCATE:S' PRIMARY LTCENSEwasHlNGToN. DC
BRTMSTToNE & Co.ATTORNEYS & SOLICITORS
I629 K STREET NW SUITE 3OOWASHINGTON DC 2()006 USA
TEL/ F Ax 1 "202'3 | e'[email protected]'W'IIV.BRIMSTONEANDCOMPANY.COM
concentration camp where her father and some ofher siblings died. Uponentering Jasenovac, the Ustasha Regime agents confiscated the jewelry thefamily had concealed on their persons . . .
This gold and other valuables are in Vatican custody and were looted by theIndependent State of Croatia between 194l-1945 as part ofthe Ustashagenoiidal campaign against Serbs, Jews, and Roma in which an estimated500,000 so called undesirables were liquidated' The gold was deposited atthe Vatican in 1946 according to contemporaneous documents authored byAllied investigators and buttressed by the swom testimony of former USSpecial Agent William Gowen who while stationed in Rome investigatedand interviewed the Ustasha involved in the transfer of lot to the Vatican in1946 and 1947.
This victim gold has been the subject ofa decade long lawsuit in the United
States 1999 to 2010 against the Vatican Bank (Institute for Religious Works)and which is still pending as to The Franciscan Order. The lawsuit howeverwas dismissed without prejudice in regards to the Vatican Banlq it wasdismissed not on the merits, but on grounds of lack of subject matterjurisdiction due to Vatican sovereign oryan immunity from legal process inihe United States. That judgment was appealed and is now final by order ofthe United States Ninth Circuit Court ofAppeals as of March 2010.
In sum, we are requesting the Commission open an inquiry into allegationsofmoney laundering ofHolocaust victirn assets by financial organsassociated with or which are agencies ofthe Vatican City State and also dealwith the question whether Holocaust victim gold and property has been used
by the Vatican City State in the minting ofor general backing ofthe Vatican
City State gold, other precious metal commernorative Euros and the ordinaryEuro coinage regime. The allegation is well founded, based on fact, andquite serious since the Commission surely cannot tolerate the Euro issuingantities laundering concentration camp gold or being associated wit} Vatican
financial institutions that refuse reasonable requests by Holocaust victims to
AITORNEYS. SOLICITORS, BARRISTERS AND AD.I.OCATES' PRIMARY T.ICENSEVI/ASHTNGTON' DC
BRtMsroNE & Co.ATTORNEYS & SOLICITORS| 629 K srREEr Nw SulrE gooWAsHtNGToN OC 200()6 USA
TELlFax l-202-318'24()[email protected]}vWW.BRIMSTONEANDCOMPANY.COM
account for their proPerty.
We stand ready to submit electronically a large volume of informationincluding testimony and documentation to support these allegations and tocooperate entirely. We also note that the Vatican Bank (Institute forReligious Works) is currently under investigation and subject to a freezingorder by Italian authorities for money laundering activity lending credulityto our allegations that Vatican City State financial practices do not meettheir obligation to the EU under applicable treaties nor comply with a FATFanti money laundering standards.
Despite being provided ample opportunity and forum, the Vatican hasrepeatedly refused to answer this allegation by Holocaust victims by citingsovereign immunity from inquiry instead. However, we assert tlroughthe Vatican Monetary Agreement with the EU, the time has finally anivedfor closure in this long unresolved matter ofHolocaust asset laundering bythe Vatican under the auspices ofthe European Commission and EuropeanCentral Bark.
Sincerely,
\rtuS^( z;:*!/ \ ' "'"'4j,,tn/ iJonathan Le\T\--l Solicitor for Dr. Milan Bates et al.
Mr. Antonio S6inz de Vicuff4 the Dircctor General of Legal Services for theEurooean Central Bank
ATTORNEYS, SOIJCITORS, BARRISTERS AND ADVOCATES' PFIMARY LICENSEWASHINGTON, DC
* * it
* *
* * * ■¿r
ir*
EUROPEAN COMMISSION DIRECTORATE GENERAL ECONOMIC AND FINANCIAL AFFAIRS Financial stability and monetary affairs Financial institutions and financial stability Head of Unit
Brussels, ECFIN/E3/BA (2010)
Subject: Holocaust Victim Gold and the EU/Vatican Monetary Agreement
Dear Mr. Levy,
Following your letter of October 20, 2010 and your request for the Commission to open an inquiry
against the Vatican City State concerning the money laundering of Holocaust victim assets and the
possible use of their gold in the minting of euro coins, the Commission examined carefully your claim.
The Monetary Agreement between the European Union (EU) and the Vatican City State, as you rightly
have noticed in your letter, obliges the Vatican City State to implement a set of EU legislation on
prevention of money laundering by the end of 2010. The Vatican authorities are currently in the
process of transposing this relevant legislation into its legal order, and I can assure you that the
Commission in its capacity carefully monitors this process.
According to the draft law received from the Vatican authorities, we can inform you that in line with
the EU laws requirements this draft foresees an establishment of a special authority, operational as of
January 1, 2011 for implementing the anti-money laundering measures, and with the right to convey
appropriate controls of the relevant institutions of both in the Vatican and the Holy See. This authority
will cooperate with the EU and with the relevant international bodies active in the fight against money
laundering.
As regards, your points on the coin issuance - the Commission Services contacted the Vatican
authorities which ensured us that:
BRIMSTONE & CO. Attorneys & SOLICITORS 1629 Κ Street NW Suite 300 Washington DC 20006 USA TEL/FAX 1 -202-318-2406
Commission européenne, B-1049 Bruxelles / Europese Commissie, B-1049 Brussel - Belgium. Telephone: (32-2) 299 1111. Office: BU-1 0/034. Telephone: direct line (32-2) 296 97 85.
Ref. Ares(2010)792544 - 09/11/2010
(i) The silver euro collector coins are minted by an external contractor - the Insitututio Poligrafico e Zecca dello Stato of the Italian Republic, and the latter purchases itself the silver needed for minting of sliver collector coins,
(ii) The gold collector coins are also minted by the Insitututio Poligrafico e Zecca dello Stato of the Italian Republic. The raw material needed for minting it is purchased each time by the Vatican City State from specialised Swiss whole-selling institutions...
Yours sincerely,
Beni
\
amin Angel
BRIMSTONE & CO.ATTORNEYS & SOLICITORS
I629 K STREET N\,VSU|TE 3OO\,VASHINGTON DC 20006 USA
-feL/Fax l'2oz31&24OGINFO@tsRIMSTONEANDCOMPANY'COMl/vYvl/v.BRTMSTONEANDgOMPANY.COM
November 17, 2010
Euronean CommissionDireitorate General for Economic and Financial AffairsMr. Benjamin AngelB-1049 BrusselsBelgium
Holocaust Victim Gold and the EU/Vatican Monetary Agreement
Dear Mr. Angel:
I am writing in response to your recent communication regarding Holocaust
Victim Gol-d and the EU/Vatican Monetary Agreement' Thank you for the
clarification that the gold and silver content ofvatican Euros is claimed to
be ftee of tainted Nazi victim gold.
As to the larger matter ofHolocaust victim gold and money laundering of
same by Vatican financial institutions, we seek clarification ofthe EU
Vatican Authority to be established in 201 I to combat active money
laundering.
l. Will our complaint about Valicar laundering, retention, and failure to
account for World War II era victim assets be addressed?
2. What is the composition of this Authority?
3. Will the Authority's rulings be considered to be within the fiamework of
EU general law and thus subject to judicial review.
Thank you again for your consideration and responsiveness in this important
matter.
ATTORNEYS, SOLICTIORS, BARRigTERg AND ADI.OCATES' PRIMARY UCENSE
WasHlNGToN, DC
BRIMSTONE & CO.ATTORNEYS & SOLICITORS
I629 K STREET NW SUITE 3OOWA3HINGTON DC 20006 USA
T ELrl F Ax 1.202.3 | &[email protected]\lt|. BRIMSTONEANDCOMPANY.COM
Dr. Jonathan Levy, PhDSolicitor for Dr. Milan Bates et al.
Mr. Antonio S6inz de Vicufia, the Director General ofLegal Services for theEuopean central Bank
aTToRNEYs, SoLIclToRs, BAFRIsTERS AND ADvocATEa' PRIMARY ucENgEwaaHlNGToN' Dc
Sincere
B R I M S T O N E & C O .
JONATHAN LEVYATTORNEY & SOLICITOR
| 629 K STREEY N\lv SUrrE 3( '0WASHINGTON DC 2()006 USA
T ELIF ax | -202-9 | a-24oe
htly 2,2011
Autorita di Informazione Finanziaria (AIF)Cardinal Attilio Nicora, PresidentPalazzo San CarloRomeVATICAN CITY
Ustasha Victim Gold and the EU/Vatican Monetary Agreement
Your Eminence:
We have previously corresponded about this matter in detail with theEuropean Commission and European Central Bank. We were then referredto the nascent AIF by the European Commission Directorate General forEconomic and Financial Affair on January 5, 2011. We have waited severalmonths for the AIF to become fully active and staffed under its enablingstatutes before contacting you about a matter involving certain accounts atthe IOR (Istituto per le Opere di Religione) tlrat have been used to launderand retain World War II era victim assets frorn former Yugoslavi4 the socalled Ustasha Treasury. Our clients include Holocaust survivors worldwideand organizations in Serbia and the United States. Vestiges ofthe assets,including moveable and immoveable property or profits there from are stillon deposit at the IOR.
This request for an investigation and inquiry deals with the unresolved issueofthb "Ustasha Treasury" and the missing gold and other valuables fromformer Yugoslavia first documented by the 1998 United States StateDeparbnent Eizenstat/Slany Report entitled Concerns About the Fate oftheWartime Ustasha Treasury which concluded tbat there was evidencepointing to Vatican involvement in laundering concentration camp gold andloot after the Second World War.
This gold bullion, silver, and other valuables are victim property looted fromSerbs, Roma, and Jews by the unrecognized Croatian Ustasha regime whichhas never been accounted for by the Vatican despite numerous demandsincluding our own lawsuit in the United States against tle Vatican Bank(Institute for Religious Works). The victims we represent suffered losses offamily property to the Usasha including gold, silver, banknotes andjewelrywhich was looted by the Ustasha and eventually deposited at the Holy See'sVatican Bank in 1944-1946 and have been unaccounted for since.
For example:
Nadezda Bates was bom in Bihac, Bosnia, Kingdom of Yugoslavia in 1923Plaintiffs father, Janko Bat€s, was a wealthy Serb businessman in Bihac andowned an establishment named Kafana Beograd. The Bates farnily omednumerous other properties through out the region and had accumulated agreat deal of wealth including an opulently funished home and jewelry
including one dozen hand made bracelets of 18 carat gold with sapphires anddiamonds and three necklaces made in the same fashion with dark sapphires,twenty rings made of l8 carat gold, hmdreds of gold ducats, and many itemsoflesser value. They also possessed a quantity ofcash and a large stock offood and drink used in their trade. On June 23, 1941 agents ofthe UstashaRegime entered into Bihac and arrested the Serb and Jewish inhabitants.Plaintiff witnessed the well organized pillaging and plundering of the Batesfamily property and Jewish properties in the neighborhood by the UstashaRegime's agents. Teams of special soldiers with trucks conducted thelooting operation in a thorough manner. The Ustasha soldiers herded theSerbs and Jews into the changing rooms at the Bihac sports grounds, wherethey were thoroughly searched relieved ofany concealed valuables. Plaintiffand her family was transported to Kmjeusa by the Ustasha where her fatherand brother were murdered by Ustasha armed forces under the command ofthe Ustasha Governor of Bihac, Ljubomir Kvatemik.
Dr. Milan Bates is a r€sident of the United Kingdom and is legalrepr6sentative to these claims on behalf of the Bates family and demands anaccounting oftheir share of gold in the Ustasha Treasury estimated to worth40 ounces and tle family jewelry worth in excess of$100,000.
Mileva Reljanovic (Vujcic) was born in 1930 in Vojskova, Bosnia, Kingdomof Yugoslavia and currently resides in Sweden. In 1942 the UstashaRegime's agents forcibty removed all Serbs ftom Vojskova in order to
"colonize" the region. The village store and its contents owtred by plaintifFsfamily was seized and the Serb residents of the town terrorized byrampaging Ustasha armed forces who killed and raped indiscriminatelyamong the Serbs. The store and its contents were converted to cash by theUstasha Regime's Ministry ofColonization and the proceeds added to theUstasha Treasury. Plaintiff and her family members were sent to Jasenovacconcentration camp where her father and some ofher siblings died. Uponentering Jasenovac, the Ustasha Regime agents confiscated the jewelry thefamily had concealed on their persons. Ms. Reljanovic, a Swedish citizenalso request s an accountrng.
The organizations, the Independent Cormcil of Serbian Roma, RepublikSrpska Krajina in Exile, The Jasenovac Memorial Center and JasenovacResearch Institute also request an accounting on behalfoftheir memberssome of who were victims or legal heirs of victims of the Ustasha.
This gold and other raluables are in Vatican Bank custody and were lootedby the Independent State of Croatia between 1941-1945 as part oftheUstasha genocidal campaign against Serbs, Jews, and Roma in which anestimated 500,000 so called undesirables, mainly Serbs and Rom4 wereliquidated. The gold and looted assets was deposited at tle Vatican Bank in1946 according to contemporaneous documents authored by Alliedinvestigators and buttressed by the sworn testimony of former US SpecialAgent William Gowen who while stationed in Rome investigated andinterviewed the Ustasha involved in the tr-ansfer of lot to the Vatican in 1946and 1947 .
I must also add the losses of our Roma clients are extremely welldocumented through the efforts ofthe Independent Council of SerbianRoma. Roma assets were often in gold and silver coin and were confiscatedby the Ustasha and became part ofthe Ustasha Treasury.
This victim gold has been the subject ofa decade long lawsuit in the UnitedStates 1999 to 2010 against the Vatican Bank (Institute for Religious Works)and which is still pending as to The Franciscan Order.' The lawsuit howeverwas dismissed without prejudice in regards to the IOR and OFM, it was
I Alperin v. Vaticln BqnL and OFM, United States District Court for the Northem Districtof Califomia. D.C. No. CV-99-0494I-MMC. Maxine M. Chesney, District Judge,Presidine.
dismissed not on the merits, but on grounds of lack of subject matterjurisdiction due to Vatican sovereign organ immunity from legal process inthe United States. Thatjudgrnent was appealed and is now final by order ofthe United States Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals as of March 2011. We arenow free to bring this matter directly to the Vatican as has been suggestedrepeatedly in the past by the IOR's attomey, Mr. Lena. We have not done sopreviously because the AII was not yet in existence and no appropriateauthority existed over the IOR or its account holders. As the appeal is nowterminated, we bring this mafter to you in a timely fashion.
In surn, we are requesting the Comrnission open an inquiry and accountinginto these well founded allegations ofrnoney laundering and retention ofHolocaust victim assets by financial organs associated with or which areagencies ofthe Vatican City State.
We stand ready to submit electronically or by post a large volume ofinformation including testimony and documentation to support theseallegations and to cooperate entirely. The legal representatives of the OFMand IOR are also in possession ofvolumes oflegal docurnents from the USCourts and their own internal investigations which have not been released.
Despite being provided ample opportunity and forum, the OFM and IOR hasrepeatedly refused to answer this allegation by Holocaust victims by citingsovereign and jurisdictional immunity from inquiry instead. However, weassert through the Vatican Monetary Agreernent with the EU, the time hasfinally anived for closure in this long unresolved matter ofHolocaust assetlaundering by the Vatican under the auspices ofthe European Commissionand European Cenhal Bank.
IOR accounts and/or their successor accounts that are or were associatedwith these names are identified as being under suspicion ofretainingHolocaust assets:
Ante BonifacicOrder of Friars MinorCroatian AlmanacCroatian Catholic Messenger NewspaperCroatian Custody ofthe Holy Family ofChicagoCroatian Historical SocietyCroatian Liberation Movement
Croatian Publishing House CroatiaDanica Newspaper (of Chicago)Fr. Krunoslav DraganovicFr. Dominik Mandic, OFMFranciscan Printery (of Chicago)Srecko PsenicnikThe Croatian Confraternity of San GirolamoThe Roman Catholic Diocese of Zageb
Thank you for your cooperation in this endeavor and with all due respect werequest that members ofthe FIA who are associated with IOR or OFMrecuse themselves from this matter owing to the appearance ofa conflict ofinterest given the prohacted litigation that preceded this request.
Finally, we will request an acknowledgement by fax +l -202-318-2406 oremail: [email protected] regarding your reoeipt ofthis letter.
Sincerely,
r. Jonathan Lely,Attomey and Solicitor
B R I M S T O N E & C O .
JONATHAN LEYY
ATTORNEY & SOLICITOR' 629 K STREET N\/v SUITE 3OO
WASHINGToN DC 20006 USAT EL/ F ax 1 -2O2-3 | A-24Od
September 24, 2011
Autoritd di Informazione Finanziaria (AIF)Cardinal Attilio Nicora, PresidentPalazzo San CarloRomeVATICAN CITY
Ustasha Victim Gold and the EU,^/atican Monetary Agreement
Yow Eminence:
As attomey for survivors ofthe Ustasha genocide in former Yugoslavia, Ihave an unshakeable belief that justice will be done. We began this effort foran accounting ofthe Ustasha Treasury in 1999 from the Vatican Bank andFranciscan Order. Therefore it was with some hope, we greeted theformation ofthe Autoritd di Informazione Finanziaria (AIF) and our referralto it by the European Commission, Directorate General for Economic andFinancial Affairs, Financial Institutions Unit.
Again we waited patiently until July 2, 201 I for the Autorita diInformazione Finanziaria to become fully staffed and functional' Wetendered our communication. See Attachment and Certificate of mailing. OnSeptember 2, 201 1 we attempted to fax your ofiice a reminder but we havereceived no response,
The matter of the Ustasha Treasury is not a solely historical claim; we areconvinced that evidence or even remnants ofthese ftmds still exist atinstitutions under the AIF's supervision. For example, in the past few years,significant accusations involving looted diamonds formerly in the custody ofthe Diocese ofZagreb have appeared, the so called "Zagorac affair."
We are aware that since July the AIF and Vatican Bank (IOR) may havesevered their overlapping staffing. This was one of our requests since ourcommunication deals in part with the IOR. However we do not understandwhy we have received no response.
Our witnesses are in their 80's and 90's. We have recently located a directwitness to money laundering ofthe Ustasha Treasury by individualsaffiliated with the IOR and OFM in post Second World War Italy. He is inhis 90's and resides in Canada.
I am sure the lack ofresponse by the AIF is an oversight. However if wehave not heard anlthing within 30 days ofreceipt ofthis communication, wewill not stand idly by while out witnesses and survivors pass on.
Finally, we still request an acknowledgement by fax +1 -202-318-2406 oremail : [email protected] regarding your receipt of this letter.
. Jonathan Levy, PhDAttomey and Solicitor
ril ll]ililrililril l il||illlllillfl lllilLJ 545 871 730 US
t{tffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffil|ilUSPS@ PRIORITY MAIL INTERNATIONAL FLAT RATE ENVELOPE
FEd: JoMTHAN H LEIryBRIMSTONE&CO37 ROYAL POIN-TE DRHTLTON HEAo SC 29926-1166
To: AUTORITA Dl INFORMAZIONE FINANZIARIAPAI-AZZO SAN CARLOOO120 CITTA DEL VAT]CANOVATICAN CITY
customs Declaration CN 22
Gin tr Comm6rcralsampe EDo@rent5 E Other tr
DetailEd d€scriDtion of contentg:
HS trrrl numbor d countY ol o.lglt:
rodddc$€t6o iv6nonh€ ' tem e tu iv l ra t lFepadcu laEg lver r th isdecarahon€€@rec landhdt thb .ndo6no l@nt6 ln5ryd6n0oou3an ic€o ' f i l c i *pErDrGdoyEgEEroror by post|l or cuslomr Egu|al ons
S€nd.tujgnltuE: JONATHAN H L€VY
Ps Fom 2e7sPM Do.or duprrc€r€ $h rm sfiout usPs.ppEv.l Th.l!!q!!qlMl!l!!!!!
lnstructions1. Priofily Mailffat raia gnv€lopo isGqulr€dwhsn shiPPing at
2. V6it that all iniomstion populaled in lh8 fonn ls cotrecl.
3. Comm€rcial sond€rs: rknown snterth€ 6 dign HS taifinumber, whlch musl b€ bas€d on ths Hsrmonizedcommodity Doscipiion snd Codlng syslom developod bv thsWodd Customs Oqanization. 'Counlry of O.igin" mearc thacountry whe€ the goods odginat€d - e.9., we€ ptoducsd /manubclu€d or assombl€d.
4. Placo your labalso it does nol wlap arcund th€ €d9€ or
5. Adhere your label to lhe package. A ser_adhesiv€ label lsrecomm€ndod. lft.psorglue is us€d, DO NOTTAPE OVER&ARCODE. Bs sure edg€s sr€ s€cure.
6. To mail: hl€malional packag6s may NOTbe placsd in aUSPS c.llBction box. Please prssent to a Ela associate inU.S. Postal Sowice €lail outl€|, hand to your l€tisr carnor atthe time of maildelivery orschedulo aerierpickup.
7. ltem must bo mailed on lhs mailing date selsdod
L The shipplng lab€l B uniqu€ and can be us€d only onc€.
Online Label RecordCu3tom! Barcode l{umber:
LJ 5,15 871 730 US
Inlsrmlronal Po3talor ti3,26Toral: lra.26
FOMJ JOMTHAN H LEVYBRIMSTONE&CO3TROYALPOINT€ORfllLToN HEAD SC 2!026-1 106
ro: AUTORITA Dl INFORMAZIONE FINANZIARIAPALAZZO SAN CARIOOO1 20 CITTA DEL VATICANOVATICAN CITY
UNIfEDSIATESPOSTAL SERV|CE .
Thank you for shipping with the United States Postal Sevice!
B R I M S T O N E & C O .
, '"' ,1".i:Xl$*'5il" "oov\fAsHrNGroN DC 2OooG usATEvFax + t -202-314-2406
cxluaens@anrusroNEANDcoM PANY.coM
November 28, 201 I
' European CommissionDirectorate General for Economic and Financial AffairsFinancial Stability & Monetary AffairsFinancial Institutions & Financial StabiliwHead of UnitMr. Benjamin AngelB-1049 BrusselsBelgiumF ax: ft32) 2 29 809 98
Via Fax, Email and Mail
In re: (Vatican) Autoriti di Informaz ione Finanziaria (AIF) & Eu/VaticarMonnetaryAgreement and European Commission Letter ofJanuary 5, 2011(ref. no 93 l9)
Dear Mr. Algel:
On January 5, 201 I following a series of letters with the EU Commission andthe Euopean Central Bank, you refened our allegations of post World WarTwo era money laundering of assets from former Yugoslavia by cunent andpast account holders at the Istituto per le Opere di Religione (IOR) to theAutoritA di Informazione Finanziaria (AIF) which was just formed at thebeginning of201l
The AIF has refused to acknowledge or respond to our correspondence datedI]uly 2,2011 and September 24, 201 1. We also attempted to fax the AIF onSeptember 2, 201 1. Based on my prior dealings with Vatican agencies andorgans, I can only conclude this is yet again deliberate nonfeasance by the AIFto avoid taking jurisdiction. I note some AIF officers are forner or culrentofficials ofthe IOR. This behavior is completely inappropriate for aa agencywhose purports to carry out harmonization and anti money laundering andanti tenorism provisions ofEU, COE and Eurozone fiscal policies'
lod',,"r,.r", "
a,,
The behavior ofthe AIF however is 10004 consistent with the IOR's 10 yearlegal battle in the United States federal courts in the case Alperin v. VaticanBank and OFM,lJnited States District Court for the Northem District ofCalifomia. D.C. No. CV-99-04941-MMC. Maxine M. Chesney, DistrictJudge, Presiding. The IOR spared no expense or legal argument in ultimatelypreventing a federal court from exercising jurisdiction over it and itsconfederate, the Franciscaa Order. This bolsters the argument that the IORand AIF should be held accountable under anti money laundering regimes.The Vatican state by engaging in intemational barking through the IOR,purporting to carry out EU anti money laundering and anti terrorismdirectives t}rough the AIF and as a member ofthe Eurozone, must bynecessity follow the applicable laws and may not hold itself above the law.
As you may know fiom our previous correspondence to the EU Commission,our firm represents over a thousand individuals of Serb, Jewish, and Romadescent worldwide with the majority resident in Serbia. We representindividuals resident in the European Union including Sweden and the UnitedKingdom. We also represent several organization including the JasenovacMemorial Society, Independent Council of Serbian Roma, and the RepublikofSrpska Krajina in Exile all ofBelgrade, Serbia and the American non profitcorporation, Jasenovac Research Institute. Our clients are well into theirsecond decade of legal struggle and many of the original victims haveunfortunately passed on without closure.
We appreciate that the European Commission has indicated that within theframework of EU law it does have authority to initiate legal or other actionsagainst the Vatican.
Therefore we unequivocally request the European Commission toinvestigate the alleged institutional shortcomings ofthe AIF in generaland if necessary hold the AIF accountable for its willful failure toaddress our legitimate money laundering allegations
In the attached exhibits we have identified several IOR accounts that evennow may still hold remnants or profits derived from the Ustasha treasury. TheIOR and at least one ofthe account holders, the Franciscan Order, havecategorically refused to cooperate. The AIF refuses to respond. Any furtherattempts by us to bring this matter before AIF appear to be futile absent acogent explanation from AIF about their handling of our correspondence.
Therefore, on behalfofour clients we allege the following:
l. The structure and personnel ofthe AIF prevent it from functioning as anindependent authority;
2. The AIF as a practice does not answer correspondence the Vatican deemsobjectionable;
3. The AIF's nonfeasance in our oarticular matter is an indication ofinstitutional failure to comply with applicable EU Directives.
We ask that the European Commission take appropriate action includingusing its good offices to resolve this matter.
It is our position that financial institutions must behave in an ethical and legalmanner. While we do not dispute the Vatican state answers solely to its Godin matters offaith, in matters of finance the laws of Man apply.
Respectfu lly submitted,
Attomey and Solicitor
PS Please note we are also copying this to Moneyval at the Council ofEuropewhich we understand is currently evaluating the fitness ofthe AIF.
Copy to:
Direitorate General ofHuman Rights and Legal AffairsDirectorate of MonitoringCouncil of Europe67075 Sfasbourg CEDEX, FRANCEemail : [email protected]
B R I M S T O N E & C O .
JONATHAN LE\ 'YATTORNEY & SOLICI fOFI
' 629 K STREET Nl /v SUITE 3OO
WASHTNGTON DC 2C)006 USA
TEL/F^x 1 -202-3 | a'24O4
Jtrly 2,2011
Autoritd di Informazione Finanziaria (AIF)Cardinal Attilio Nicora, PresidentPalazzo San CarloRomeVATICAN CITY
Ustasha Victim Gold and the EU/Vatican Monetary Agreement
Your Eminence:
We have previously conesponded about this matter in detail with dleELrropean Commission and European Cenhal Bank- We were then referredto thi nascent AtF by the European Commission Directorate General for
Econornic and Financial Affair on January 5, 20 | | We have waited severalrnonths for the AIF to becorne fully active and staffed under its enablingstatutes before contacting you about a matter involvitrg cefiain accounts atthe IOR (lstituto per le Opere di Religione) that have been rsed to launder
and retain World War II era victim assets fiom former Yugoslavia, the so
called Ustasha Treasury. Our clients include Holocaust survivors worldwide
and organizations in Serbia and the United States. Vestiges ofthe assets,including moveable and immoveable property or profits there fiom are still
on deposit at lhe IOR.
This request for an investigation and inquiry deals with the unresolved issue
ofthe "iJstasha Treasury" and the missing gold and other valuables iiom
former Yugoslavia first documented by the 1998 United States StateDepartmeni Eizenstat/Slany Report entitled Concerns About the Fate ofthe
Wirtime Ustasha Treasury which concluded that there was evidencepointing to Vatican involvement in laundering concentration camp gold and
loot after the Second World War.
This gold bullion, silver, and other valuables are victim property looted from
Serbs, Roma, and Jews by the unrecognized Croatian Ustasha regime whichhas never been accounted for by the Vatican despite numerous demandsincluding our own lawsuit in the United States against the Vatican Bank(hrstitute for Religious Works). The victims we represent suffered losses offamily property to the Ustasha including gold, silver, banknotes and jewelry
which was looted by the Ustasha and eventually deposited at the Holy See'sVatican Bank in 1944-1946 and have been unaccounted for since
For example:
Nadezda Bates was bom in Bihac, Bosnia, Kingdom ofYugoslavia in 1923.Plaintiffs father, Janko Bates, was a wealthy Serb businessman in Bihac and
owned an establishment named Kafana Beograd The Bates family ownednumerous other properties through out the region and had accumulated agreat deal of wealth including an opulently furnished home andjewelryrncluding one dozen hand made bracelets of l8 caral gold with sapphires and
diamonds and three necklaces made in the sarne fashion with dark sapphires,twenty rings rnade of l8 carat gold, hundreds of gold drtcats' and many itemsoflesser value. They also possessed a quantity ofcash and a large stock of
food and drink used in their trade. On June 23, l94l agents ofthe UstashaRegime entered into Bihac and arrested the Serb and Jewish inhabitantsPlaintiff witnessed the well organized pillaging and plundering of the Batesfarnily property and Jewish properties in the neighborhood by the UstashaRegime's agents. Teams ofspecial soldiers with tnrcks conducted thelooting operation in a thorough manner. The Ustasha soldiers herded the
Serbs and Jews into the changing rooms at the Bihac sports grounds, where
they were thoroughly searched relieved of any concealed valuables. Plaintiff
and her family was fansported to l(mjeusa by the Ustasha wlrere her father
and brother were murdered by Ustasha armed forces under the command of
the Ustasha Govemor of Bihac, Ljubomir Kvatemik.
Dr. Milan Bates is a resident ofthe United Kingdom and is legalrepresentative to these claims on belralfofthe Bates family and demands an
accounting oftheir share of gold in the Ustasha Treasury estimated to wortlr40 ounces and the family jewelry worth in excess of$100,000
Mileva Reljanovic (Vujcic) was born in 1930 in Vojskova, Bosni4 Kingdom
ofYugoslavia and currently resides in Sweden. In 1942 the UstashaRegime's agents forcibly removed all Serbs from Vojskova in order to
"colonize" the region. The village store and its contents owned by plaintifPsfamily was seized and the Serb residents of the town terrorized byrampaging Ustasha armed forces who killed and raped indiscriminatelyamong the Serbs. The store and its contents rtere converted to cash by theUstasha Regime's Ministry ofColonization and the proceeds added to theUstasha Treasury. Plaintiffand her family members were sent to Jasenovacconcentration camp where her father and some ofher siblings died. Uponentering Jasenovac, the Ustasha Regime agents confiscated the jewelry thefarnily had concealed on their persons. Ms. Reljanovic, a Swedish citizenalso request s an accountlng.
Tlre organizations, the Independent Corrncil ofSerbian Roma, RepublikSrpska Krajina in Exile, The Jasenovac Memorial Center and JasenovacResearch Institute also req[est an accounting on behalfoftlreir memberssorne ofwho were victims or legal heirs ofvictims ofthe Ustasha.
This gold and other valuables are in Vatican Bank custody and were looted
by the Independent State ofCroatia between l94l -1945 as part oftheUstasha genocidal campaign against Serbs, Jews, and Rorna in which anestimated 500,000 so called undesirables, mainly Serbs and Roma, wereliquidated.
'fhe gold and looted assets was deposited at the Vatican Bank in1946 according to contemporaneous documents authored by Alliedinvestigators and butlressed by the sworn testimony of former US SpecialAgent William Gowen who while slationed in Rome investigated andinierviewed the Ustasha involved in the hansfer of lot to the Vatican in 1946and '1947 .
I must also add the losses ofour Roma clients are extremely welldocumented tlrrough the efforts ofthe Independent Council of SerbianRoma. Roma assets were often in gold and silver coin and were confiscatedby the Ustasha and became part ofthe Ustasha Treasury.
This victim gold has been the subject ofa decade long lawsuit in the United
States 1999 io 2010 against the Vatican Bank (hrstitute for Religious Works)
and which is still pending as to The Franciscan Order.' The lawsuit however
was dismissed without prejudice in regards to the IOR and OFM, it was
' Alperin t. Valican Rank atd Ot&4,United States District Court for the Northem District
oftalifornia. D.C. No. Cv-99-04941-MMC. Maxine M Chesney, District Judge,Presidine.
dismissed not on the merits, but on grounds oflack of subject matterjurisdiction due to Vatican sovereign organ immunity fiom legal process Inthe United States. That judgment was appealed and is now final by order oftlre United States Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals as of March 201 I. We arenow fiee to bring this matter directly to the Vatican as has b€en suggestedrepeatedly in the past by the IOR's attorney, Mr. Lena. We have not done sopreviously because the AIF was not yet in existence and no appropriateauthority existed over the IOR or its account holders. As dre appeal is nowterminated, we bring this matter to you in a timely fashion.
In sum, we are requesting the Commission open an inquiry and accountinginto these well founded allegations of money laundering and retention ofHolocaust victim assets by financial organs associated with or which areagencies ofthe Vatican City Stat€.
We stand ready to submit electronically or by post a large volume ofinfonnation including testimony and documentation to sttpport theseallegations and to cooperate entirely. The legal representatives ofthe OFMand IOR are also in possession of volumes of legal documents fiom the tJSCourts and tlreir own intemal investigations which have not been released
Despite being provided arnple opportunity and forum, the OFM and IOR hasrepeatedly refused to answer this allegation by Holocaust victims by citingsovereign and jurisdictional immunity ftom inquiry instead. However, weassert through the Vatican Monetary Agrsement with the EU, the time hasfinally arrived fbr closure in this long unresolved matter of Holocaust assetlaundering by the Valican under the auspices ofthe European Commtsstonand European Central Bank.
IOR accounts and/or their successor accounts that are or were associatedwith these names are identified as being under suspicion ofretainingHolocaust assets:
Ante BonifacicOrder of Friars MinorCroatian AlmanacCroatian Catholic Messenger NewspaperCroatian Custody ofthe Holy Family ofChicagoCroatian Historical SocietyCroatian Liberation Movement
Croatian Publishing House CroatiaDanica Newspaper (of Chicago)Fr. Krunoslav DraganovicFr. Dominik Mandic, OFMFranciscan Printery (of Chicago)Srecko PsenicnikThe Croatian Conffaternity of San GirolamoTlre Roman Catholic Diocese of Zagreb
Thank you for your cooperation in this endeavor and with all due respect werequest that members ofthe FIA who are associated with IOR or OFMrecuse themselves llom tlris matter owing to the appearance ofa conflict ofinterest given the protracted litigation that preceded this request.
Finalfy, we wiff request an acknowledgement by fax +l-202'318-2406 or
email: [email protected] regarding your receipt ofthis letter.
Sincerely,
N,l:l
:
Iri
l'r1
3
;
33
a
!
Ib:lFnT
Fn1
'lENlr l=
{xheE$S:'d
- ; ;B
ZegF-
$-:rjl
I
B R I M E T O N E & C O .
JONATHAN LEVYATAORNEY & SOLICITOR
I629 K STREET N\/v SUITE 3OO
WA5HINGTON DC 20006 USA
TEL/F^X | -202'3 | A'2406
September 24, 201I
Autoritd di lnformzzione Finanziaria (AlF)Cardinal Attilio Nicora, PresidentPalazzo San CarloRomeVATICAN CITY
Ustasha Victim Gold and the EU/Vatican Monetary Agreement
Your Eminence:
As attomey for survivors ofthe Ustasha genocide in former Yugoslavia' I
have an unshakeable belief that j ustice will be done' We began this effort for
an accounting ofthe Ustasha Treasury in 1999 from the Vatican Bank and
Franciscan Oider. Therefore it was with some hope, we greeted the
formation ofthe Autoriti di Informazione Finanziaria (AIF) and our refenal
to it by the European Commission, Directorate General for Economic and
Financial Affairs, Financial Institutions Unit.
Again we waited patiently until July2,20ll for the Autorile di. .-.Iriformazione Finanziaria to become fully staffed and functional' We
tendered our communication. See Attachment and Certificate of mailing' On
September 2, 201 I we attempted to ffi your office a reminder but we have
received no response.
The matter ofthe Ustasha Treasury is not a solely historical claim; we are
convinced that evidence or even remnants ofthese funds still exist at
institutions under the AIF's supervision. For example, in the past few years'
significant accusations involving looted diamonds formerly in the custody of
thi Diocese ofZagreb have appeared, the so called "Zagorac affair'"
We are aware tlat since July the AIF and Vatican Bank (IOR) may havesevered their overlapping staffing' This was one of our requests since ourcommunication deals in part with the IOR. However we do not understandwhy we have received no resPonse.
Our witnesses are in their 80's and 90's. We have recently located a directwitness to money laundering ofthe Ustasha Treasury by individualsaffiliated with the IOR and OFM in post Second World War Italy. He is inhis 90's and resides in Canada.
I am sure the lack ofresponse by the AIF is an oversight. However if we
have not heard anything within 30 days ofreceipt ofthis communication, we
will not stand idly by while out witnesses and survivors pass on.
Finally, we still request an acknowledgement by fax +l -202-318-2406 or
email: [email protected] regarding your receipt oftbis letter'
Sincerely,
. JonathanLevy, PhDSolicitor
ril il]ililtilril|| | llffillilllllllil$;fl"*"' |flffiffi#mlffiilLJ 5,15 871 730 USUSPS@PRI--ORITYMAILINTERNATIONAL|I ITAIEIIYE!9EE
FON: JOMTHAN H LEVYaRlMsroNEaco.37 ROYAL POIITTE DRHTLTON HEAo 5C 29926-11€6
Customs Declaratlon CN 22
6in E Codmorcralsrhpro EDodments E olhor tr
OO12O CITIA DET VATICANOVATICAN CITY
r. nutonfl ot tlronulzloNE F NANZIARIADetalled de3cription of contenE:
HS t rltl nunbor tnd counrry olorlgln:
fl.llho ot0co DrL s|.nDr rh€ unde6'oh6d who$ ndme sf,d oddters dte glveF on $o o4 @nltv lhal th' t6n|4b€ gl@n h inls . .dJ.i,;;;6;d;iffiih;l rr''s ,tenioi:ii not-ontatn env oang.tod on'ch or arrcros Dohrbrrsd Dv tooBBuono. bY Doslalot 4llomt ie9llgtlonr
sondor'. llgn.ruo: JoNATTiAN H LEVY
's .o- *'aour Do nor dur{'c.r. ih6 rom nr^our rJsE]!ry!-----I!-I4!3slgr!l4l:9gtglr
K_
lnstructions1. Prio.ity Mailfl8l r6to 6nvolop6ls Equircd wh€n shlpPrng al
2. V€rlt tiat all lnrotmatlon popubl€d in lh€ tom ls comcl
3 Commsrcial sendols: lf known 6ntff ths 6 dlgll HS larltlnlmbdr, whlch nlslba bas€d on the Harmonizodcommodlty osscrlption and codlng svsl€m dov€lopod bv lhsWorld Cusloms otganlzalion. "counlry oforigln" mstm lnecounlry whe€ thsgoods otlginal€d ' e g, we€ ptodu€d /manulaclulad ot esssmbrod
4. Ptacs your label so it doss not wrap atound lha sdgo ol
5 Adhsrs vour lsbeltohe package A s€llsdh€swa labellsrecomman'OeO. ll tapa orsluo rs used DO NOT rAPE OVERBARCODE. A€ su€ edgos€r€ s€cure
6 To mailr Int€mational packag$ m.vNOIb€ plac€d n.USPS collsction box. Pl6as€ present to a retail associale i.U.S. Posi.l &wice .etall oullal. hand to vour l€ter carEr etth6llms ofmaildelivery or schedlls a cariar pickuP
7.lt€m must b€ mailed on lns mailing dale sel€ded
L Th6snipplng lab€l bunique and can be used onlv ond
Online Label RecordCu3toms Barcodo Number:
LJ 545 871 730 US
htom.tl6nerporl.g. ll3-26Tolrl 113.26
FOM: JONATHAN H L€VYBRrrisToNE & co37 ROYAI POINTE DRHILTON HEAO SC 2092€_1146
T6: AUTORITA OI INFORIJIAZIONE FINANZIARIAPALAZZO SAN CARLOOO120 CITTA DEL VATICANOVATICAN CITY
##ffi. Thank you for shipping with the lJnited states Postal seNice!
u . s:^lgsrAG€*r.''o','r&i?,itt 3c
,$h1,1.
Fs Fom 38'17 AP'll2oo7
EUROPEAN COMMISSIONDIREC'TORATE GENERALECONOMIC AND FIMNCIAL AFFAIRSFinandal stablllty End monetary aflai|sFhanclal Instltutlom .nd flnanclal 3tlblllty
DG ECFIN
09 11 rntn**,1gQ5L1q
Brussels,ECFIN/E3IBA (2010)
SgUijg!: Holocaust Victim Gold and th€ Eu/Vaticar Motrotrry Agreement
Dear Mr. Levy,
Following your letter of October 20, 2010 and your request for the Commission to open an inquiryagainst the Vatican City State conceming the money laundering of Holocaust victim assets and thepossible use oftheir gold in the minting ofeuro coins, the Commission examined carefully your claim.
The Monetary Agrcement between the European Union (EU) and the Vatican City State, as you rightlyhave noticed in your letter, obliges the Vatican City State to implement a set of EU legislation onprevention of money laundering by the end of 2010. The Vatican authorities are curently in theprocess of tansposing this relevant legislation into its legal order, and I can assue you that theCommission in its capacity carefully monitors this plocess.
According to the draft law received ftom the Vatican autho ties, we can inform you that in line withthe EU laws requirem€nts this draft foresees an establishment of a special autholity, operational as ofJanuary 1, 2011 for implementing the anti-money launderi[g measues, and with the right to conveyapprop ate controls ofthe relevant institutions ofboth in the Vatican and the Holy See. This authoritywill cooperate with the EU and with the relevant intemational bodies active in the fight against moneylaundering.
As regards, your points on the coin issuance - the Cornmission Services contacted the Vaticanauthorities which ensured us that:
BRIMSTONE & CO.Aftorneys & SOLICITORS1629 K Street NW Suite 300Washington DC 20006 USAT EL/ F AX 1 -202-3 1 8-2406
Commission eurcpesnn€, B-1049 Bluxelles / Europese Commissie, B-1049 Brusset- Betgium. Tet6phon6i (32-2) ?9911 11.Ofiice: BU-1 0/034 Terephone: direcl line (32 2) 296 97 E5.
E--.+
(i) The silver euro collector coins are miutsd by an extemal contactor - thc IDsitututio Poligrafiao GZecca dello Stato ofthe ftalian Republic, and the latter purchases itself the silver needed for mintingof sliver collector coirs,
(ii) The gold collector coins are also miul€d by the lositututio Poligrafico e Zecca dello Stato of th€Italian Repubtic. The raw mat€rial needed for minting it is purchased each tine by the Vatican CityState ftom sDcaialised Swiss whole-sellinc institutions...
Yours sincerely,
/l r-,l \ -"".f;**ro
DG Fl ' " . ' '
5 01 rut l
ares 53 13EUROPEAN COMMISSIONDIRECTORATE GENEFiAIECONOMIC AND FINANCIAL AFFAIRSFinancial stab liry and monetgryalhilsFlnanclal lmrltutlon3 end flnanclal siablllty
Brussels,ECFIN/E3IEK/LB (2010)
Subiect: Youi letter ofNovember 17, 2010, regarding the Eu/Vatican Monetary Agreement
Dear Mr. Levy,
I thank you for your letter, where you ask for clarifications about the special authority which theVatican is setting up in order to implement anti-money laundering measures - the 'Auto td dieInformazione finanziaria' (AIF). It should be noted that the Vatican law hansposing Directive2005/60/EC on the prevention of the use ofthe financial system for the purpose ofmoney launderingand teno st financing is still at a &aft stage. According to information fiom the Vatican, it isexpected to enter into force as ofJanuary 1, 2011.
Please find below my answers to your specific questions.
1) The Directive 2005/60lEC of the Euopean Parliament and of the Council of 26 October 2005 onthe prevention of the use of the financial system for the purpose of money laundering and teroristfinancing aims to prevent the use of the financial system for the purpose of moDey laundering andtenorist financing. This Directive requires Member States to prohibit money laundering and tenoristfinancing ald to set up a preventive system obliging the financial sector and a wide range of otherpgrsons and entities to undenake certain measures: these inciude inler alia identiiyihg their customers,keeping appropriate records, establishing intemal procedures to train staff and guard against moneylaundering and reporting suspicion of money laundering and teno st financing to the competentnational authorities. As an EU Directive, Directive 2005/60/EC is not directly applicable and EUMember States have to tanspose its requirements into their national legislation (Article 288 of theTreaty on the Functionilg of the European Union), which all EU Member States have done. As Imentioned in my reply to your previous letter, the Monetary Agreement between the EU and theVatican City State obliges the latter to implement the Directive in its legal order.However, the entities subject to anti-money laundering - combating the financing of tenorismobligations are limited to natual and legal persons; thus, states as such are not covered by the
BRIMSTONE & CO,Attomeys & SOLICITORS1629 K Street Nw Suite 300Washington DC 20006 USATEUFAX 1-202-3t8-2406
Commission eurcpeenn€, B-1049 Bruxelies / Eurcpese Commissie, B-1049 Brussel, Beisium. Telephon€: (32-2) 299 11 ll.Office BUI 0/034. Telelhoner direct line (32-21296 97 E5
Directive. Moreover, the directive 2005/60,8C does not cover the compensation ofpe$ons who havebeen the victims of money laundering offences or predicate offence to money larmdering. It isfurthermore to be noted, that the Directive provides for minimum harmonisation which means thatMember States may adopt or retain in force stricter provisions in this fi€ld than those laid down in theDirective in older to prevent money laundering and tenorist financing.
The role ofthe European Commission in this context is as followsr if a Member State fails to pass therequired national legislation, or if the national legislation does not adequately comply with therequirements ofthe Directive, the European Comrnission may initiate legal action against the MemberState. However, under the Treaty on Euopean Union and the Treaty on the Functioning of theEuopean Union, the European Commission has no general powers to interyene in padicular cases asdescribed in your letter. With regard to the explanations provided above, you should seek redress atnational level tl|Ioueh the comDetent autho ties.
2) According to the draft Vatican law tansposing the Directive, The 'Autoritd die lnformazionefinanziaria' (AIF) will be composed of a chief executive oflicer and his/her staff will be appointedftom among persons ofadequate and proven competence and professionalism.
3) The Authority's rulings are within the fiamework ofEU law but they are only indirectly subject tojudicial review. lt means that if the Vatican City State fails to properly tanspose the Directive of itdoes not adequately comply with the requirements of the Directive, the European Commissiol mayinitiate legal action against the Vatican City State. However, as mentioned under the reply to question1) above, the European Commission has no general powers to intervene in particular cases asdescribed in your letter.
Yours sincerely,
Benjamin Angel
***
***
Brussels,ECFrN/E3IRV (2011)
DG ECFIN
0B 12 2011
art 451\534
Subject: Your letter of Novernber 28, 201l, regarding the EU/Vatican Monetary Agreernent and
the role of the Autoriti di Informazione Finanziaria (AIF)
Dear Mr. Lely,
Thank you the above letter, by which you request the European Commission to investigate allegedshortcomings of the AIF. In addition to what we stated on December 09, 2010 and January 5, 201 1 inresponse to your previous letters, I am pleased to answer to your request as follows:
Pursurmt to Article 8 (l) (b) of the 2010 Monetary Agreement, the Vatican City State shall undertaketo adopt all appropriate measures with a view to implementing the EU legal acts and listed in the An-nex in the field of, amongst others, prevention of money laundering.
As detailed in our previous response, Directive 2O05l60lEC of the European Parliament and of theCouncil of 26 October 2005 on the prevention of the use of the financial system for the purpose ofmoney laundering and terrorist financing aims to prevent the use of the financial systern for the pur-pose of money laundering and terrorist financing. Directive 2005/60lEC is part of the Amex to theAgreanent. While implanenting the provisions of this Directive, the Vatican City State has set up theFinancial Intelligence Unit (Autoritd di lnformazione Finanziaria (AIF)). Pursuant to Article 20 of Di-rective 2005/60/EC, applicable to the Vatican City State by means of the Monetary Agreonort, theAIF shall be responsible for receiving and to the extent permitted, requesting, analysing and dissemi-nating to the competent authorities, disclosures of information which concern potential money laun-dering. The cooperation duties of Financial lntelligence Units are laid down in detail in Council Deci-sion 200O/642|JHA conceming arangements for cooperation between financial intelligence units ofthe Mernber States in respect of exchanging information. This Council Decision will be added to the
BRIMSTONE & CO.Attomeys & SOLICITORS1629 K Street NW Suite 300Washinglon DC 20006 USATEL//FAX 1 -202 -318 -2406
Commission europeenne, B-1049 Bruxelles / Europese Commissie, B-1049 Brussel - Belgium. Telephone: (32-2) 299 11 11.Offrce: BU-1 0/034. Telephone: direcl line (32-2) 296 97 85.
EUROPEAN COMMISSIONOIRECTORATE GENERALECONOMIC AND FINANCIAL AFFAIRSFinancial stability and monetary affairsFinancial institutions and financial stabiliWHead of Unit
Annex of the Monetary Agreement and apply to the AIF. Should the Vatican City State fail to complywith the AIF's duties under the Directive or Decision, the European Union may bring the matter beforethe Court of Justice in line with Article 10 (2) of the Monetary Agreement.
With regard to the alleged shortcoming of the AIF (AIF not independent, AIF staff officials from theIstituto per le Opere di Religione, AIF not replying to your conespondence) and the AIF's cooperationand investigation duties under the Directives, the following has to be understood:
The AIF is in charge of receiving information from the institutions and percons covered by the Di-rective and analysing and disserninating to the competent authorities (Articles 2l and 22 of Directive2005160/EC). Moreover, the AIF will be obliged to cooperate with other Financia.l lntelligence Unitsfrom EU Member States as per Council Decision 2000/642|JHA.
The institutions and persons obliged provide information to tlle AIF are defined in Article 2 of Di-rective 2005/60/EC and are those who me involved in larger cash management and payment transac-tions: credit institutions, financial institutions, auditors, trust and company service providers, real es-tate agents and others. The AIF is obliged to receive and analyse information received from this groupof interlocutors.
Persons or groups of individuals other than those defined in the Directive are not obliged to provideinformation to firancial intelligence units, nor have the latter an obligation to treat requests from thesepersons or groups. Under normal circumstances, an individual who is victim ofor aware of potentialmoney laundering would or could inform police or other law enforcement bodies, it being understoodthat police and the law enforcement bodies would then have to report to their Financial lntelligenceUnits.
Given that your clients are neither belonging to the groups defined in Directive 2005156/EC nor are,for obvious reasons, staffof Financial Intelligence Units from other EU Member States, the AIF is notobliged under the Monetary Agreement to provide you with infonnation or respond to your requests.
The obligations of the Vatican City State towards the European Union to combat money launderingobligations as laid in the above Directive and Decision are solely govemed by the Monetary Agree-ment. One may regret that the AIF has not responded to your correspondence, but the European Com-mission is neither in a position nor entitled to question and judge the administrative procedures andcommunication policy of the Vatican City State on matters that are not covered by the MonetaryAseement.
Benjamin Angel
Yours sincerely,
BnrnastoNE& Co.JoN.aTxIN LEVY
I629 K STREET NW SUITE 3OOWASHINGToN DC 20006 USATELIFAX + r -2o2-S | 8-24OG
cHAM B E Rs@en r u sroN EAN DcoM p/\Ny.coM
February 10,2012
European CommissionDirectorate General for Economic and Financial AffairsFinancial Stability & Monetary AffairsFinancial Institutions & Financial StabilityHead of Unit - Mr. Benjamin AngelB-1049 Brussels, Belgium
Fax: (+J/) 2 29 809 98
Via Fax, Email and Mail
In re: (Vatican) Autoritd di Informazione Finanziaria (AIF) & EU/VaticanMonetary Agreement and European Commission Letters of January 5,2011(no. 9319), December 8, 2011 (no. 1324531) referencing Directive2005160/EC
Dear Mr. Angel:
This is a notice under Article 265 of the Treaty on the Functioning of theEuropean Union to the Commission to take the requested action.
It is requested that the European Commission take appropriate action toenforce applicable provisions Directive 2005/601 EC (hereafter "theDirective") against the Vatican Autorita di Informazione Finanziaria(hereafter "VAIF") and Vatican City State, subject to EU jurisdictionpursuant to the EU/Vatican Monetary Agreement, for the reasons statedbelow and incorporated by reference in our previous correspondence with theCommission. If action is not taken in 60 duyr, a complaint will be filed withthe European General Court seeking relief under Articles265 and266 of theTreaty on the Functioning ofthe European Union.
On January 5,2011 following a series of letters with the EU Commission andthe European Central Bank, the Commission referred our allegations of post
l']H*,*rr.r*E & co
World War Two era money laundering of assets from former Yugoslavia bycurrent and past account holders at le Opere di Religione (hereafter IOR) tothe newly established Istituto per to the Vatican Autoritd di InformazioneFinanziaria (VAIF).
The VAIF has refused to acknowledge or respond to our correspondencedated July 2,2011 and September 24,20L1. We also attempted to fax the AIFon September 2,20IL Given the passage of time, a response is not likely tobe forthcoming from the VAIF.
We then complained to the Commission which however refused to take actionfor the reasons cited in its December 8,2011 letter and discussed infra.
After careful consideration and research, we respectfully disagree with theCommission's interpretation that the VAIF may willfully ignore ourcomplaints of money laundering at the IOR and still remain withincompliance ofthe Directive. The Commission's analysis of December 8 is inerror with both the letter and spirit of the Directive.
The Commission enoneously claims that the VAIF may ignore reports ofmoney laundering because the reporting party, attorney-solicitor Dr. JonathanLevy and his law firm Brimstone & Co., does not fall under the ambit of theDirective, Article 2(1) and therefore is not among the list of interlocutors theVAIF is required to respond to.
The Commission is in error; the complaint was made to the VAIF by alicensed, professional attorney about specific large financial fansactions oflooted properly falling under the ambit of the Directive and VAIF's owngoverning documents which vest it with oversight responsibilities for theIOR.
Directive Article 2(1X3Xb) specifies that independent legal professionals inthe exercise of their activities that are acting on behalf of and fortheir client inany financial transaction are obliged to report money laundering to themember state FIU which is the VAIF for transactions within or involvingentities of the Vatican City State.
The interpretation of this section of the Directive has been construed broadlyrather than narowly. See Also Nobel Chemicals Ltd v EuropeanCommission (C-550/07 P [2010], 5 C.M.L.R. 19. An attorney representing
claimants to disputed property who has been engaged in litigation with theIOR and one of its depositors since 1999 is not a casual observer but is alicensed legal professional acting in his professional capacity. Further he has
come into possession of substantial documentation supporting the allegationof ongoing money laundering of Holocaust derived assets or profits at theIOR.
The Directive does not define the term "financial transaction" but aconstructive or resulting trust of the type implied in law has been createdbetween the IOR and Holocaust victims until such time the IOR accounts fortheir funds.
Further, it is disingenuous to refer Holocaust survivors to Vatican policeauthorities or the Vatican FIU. The VAIF functions as both the treasurypolice and FIU for the Vatican City State. The VAIF is the only competentauthority given the population of the Vatican City State amounts to only 800residents.
Ongoing money laundering has been considered before in the case of the
Swiss National Bank. The SNB's deliberate retention of looted assets wascorrectly described as money laundering. The SNB investigation by the
Volcker and Bergier commissions led to the eventual settlement of the issue.
The IOR matter is no less serious, it is disappointing that the Commissionfeels it must lend its political and moral support to the IOR and VAIF bydeclining its duty to enforce the Directive as it has many times before withother EU members such as France, Poland, and Spain.
While we appreciate the Commission's position of seeming rectitude, theCommission must rcaliz-e that it is aiding and abetting the VAIF and IOR intheir ongoing refusal to account for Holocaust derived assets. If theCommission doubts the veracity of our claims, we again invite theCommission to consult the 1998 US State Department Report on The Fate ofthe Ustasha Treasury available ott www.state.gov/wwilregions/eur/rpt-9806_ng_links.html.
The Vatican City State has failed to fulfill its treaty obligation and appropriateaction against it should be taken beginning with a request that the VAIFrespond to the report made to it by Holocaust survivors.
Sincerely,
Dr. Jonathan LevyAttorney and Solicitor for Holocaust Survivors and Organizations:Dr. Milan Bates, William Dorich, Vojislav Poduda , Jasenovac MemorialCenter, Independent Council of Serbian Rom4 Republik Srpska Krajina inExile et al.
Copies to:
Director General for Legal ServicesEuropean Central Bank
Directorate General of Human Rights and Legal AffairsDirectorate of MonitoringCouncil of Europe
**
***
t*t
**
EUROPEAN COMMISSIONOIRECTORATE GENERALECONOMIC AND FINANCIAL AFFAIRSFinancial stability and monetary affairsFinancial institutions and ffnancial $abilityHead of Unit
DG rt)P'tru
08 i2 2011
Brussels, arc 4 ,J\ 5 31ECFrN/E3/RV (201r)
Subject: Your letter of November 28,201l, regarding the EU/Vatican Monetary Agreement and
the role of the Autoritir di Informazione Finanziaria (AIF)
Dear Mr. Lcrry,
Thank you the above letter, by which you request the European Commission to investigate allegedshortcomings of the AIF. In addition to what we stated on December 09, 2010 and January 5, 201I inresponse to your previous letters, I am pleased to answer to your request as follows:
Pursuant to Article 8 (1) (b) of the 2010 Monetary Agreement, the Vatican City State shall undertaketo adopt all appropriate measures with a view to implanenting the EU legal acts and listed in the An-ncx in the freld of, amongst others, prevention of money laundering.
As dctailed in our prcvious response, Directive 2005/60/EC of the European Parliament and of theCouncil of 26 October 2005 on the prevention of the use of the financial system for the purpose ofmoney laundering and terrorist financing aims to prevant the use of the financial system for the pur-pose of money laundering and terrorist financing. Directive 2005/60iEC is part of the Annex to theAgreement. While implernenting the provisions of this Directive, the Vatican City State has set up theFinancial Intelligence Unit (Autoriti di Informazione Finanziaria (AIF)). Pursuant to Article 20 of Di-rective 20O5l60lEC, applicable to the Vatican City State by means of the Monetary Agreement, theAIF shall be responsible for receiving and to the extent permitted, requesting, analysing and dissemi-nating to the competent authorities, disclosures of information which concern potential money laun-dering. The cooperation duties of Financial Intelligence Units are laid down in detail in Council Deci-sion 2000r'642lJHA concerning iurangements for cooperation between financial intelligence units ofthe Member States in respect of exchanging information. This Council Decision will be added to the
BRIMSTONE & CO.Attorneys & SOLICITORS1629 K Street NW Suite 300Washington DC 20006 USA'rEL/FAX | -202-3 | 8-?406
Commission europdenne, B-1049 Bruxelles / Europese Commissie, B-1049 Brussel - Belgium. Telephone: (32-2)ZW 11 '11.
Office: BU-1 0/034. Telephone: direct line (32-2) 296 97 85.
Annex of the Monetary Agreement and apply to the AIF. Should the Vatican City State fail to complywith the AIF's duties under the Directive or Decision, the European Union may bring the matter beforethe Court of Justice in line with Article l0 (2) of the Monetary Agreonent.
With regard to the alleged shortcoming of the AIF (AIF not independent, AIF staff officials from theIstituto per le Opere di Religione, AIF not replying to your correspondence) and the AIF's cooperationand investigation duties under the Directives, the following has to be understood:
The AIF is in charge of receiving information from the institutions and penions covered by the Di-rective and analysing and disseminating to the competent authorities (Articles 2l and 22 of Directive2005/60lEC). Moreover, the AIF will be obliged to cooperate with other Financial lntelligence Unitsfrom EU Member States as per Council Decision 2000/&2/JHA.
The instirutions and persons obliged provide information to the AIF are defined in Article 2 of Di-rective 2005160/EC and are those who are involved in larger cash management and payment transac-tions: credit institutions, financial institutions, auditors, trust and company service providers, real es-tate agents and others. The AIF is obliged to receive and analyse information received from this groupof interlocutors.
Persons or groups of individuals other than those defined in the Directive are not obliged to provideinformation to financial intelligence units, nor have the latter an obligation to treat requests from thesepersons or groups. Under normal circumstances, an individual who is victim of or aware of potentialmoney laundering would or could inform police or other law enforcement bodies, it being understoodthat police and the law enforcement bodies would then have to report to their Financial IntelligenceUnits.
Given that your clients are neither belonging to the groups defined in Directive 2005/56lEC nor are,for obvious reasons, staffof Financial Intelligence Units from other EU Mernber States, the AIF is notobliged under the Monetary Agreement to provide you with information or respond to your requests.
The obligations of the Vatican City State towards the European Union to combat money launderingobligations as laid in the above Directive and Decision are solely governed by the Monetary Agree-ment. One may regret that the AIF has not responded to your correspondence, but the European Com-mission is neither in a position nor cntitled to question and judge the administrative procedures andcommunication policy of the Vatican City State on matters that are not covered by the MonetaryAgrcement.
A
1t
III
{
Benjamin Angel
Yours sincerely.
EUROPEAN COMMISSION DIRECTORATE GENERAL ECONOMIC AND FINANCIAL AFFAIRS Finandal stability and monetary affairs Financial institutions stability mechanisms Head of Unit
Brussels, ECFIN/E3/RV (2012)
Subject: Your letter of 10 February 2012 regarding the EU/Vatican Monetary Agreeement and Directive 2005/60/EC to be applied by the Vatican Autorità di Informazione Finanziaria
Dear Mr. Levy,
Thank you very much for your letter of 10 February 2012, by which you refer to previous correspondence with regard to the above issue and ask the European Commission to take appropriate action.
The concerns raised and repeated in your letters were largely addressed in our previous correspondence to which I would like to refer.
As to your request that the European Commission take action against the Vatican Autorità di Informazione Finanziaria (hereafter AIF) with regard to Directive 2005/60/EC and potential money laundering by the Istituto per le Opere di Religione (hereafter lOR), the following has to be understood: The European Union has signed a monetary agreement with the Vatican City State, which set up the AIF in 2011. By means of the Monetary Agreement, the provisions of Directive 2005/60/EC apply to the AIF within the jurisdiction of the Vatican City State. The IOR, however, does not fall within the jurisdiction of the Vatican City State but belongs to the Holy See, which is a different entity under international public law. It must be understood that the Holy See and the European Union have not signed whatsoever agreement on the application of Directive 2005/60/EC or any other legal instrument to combat money laundering. Therefore, the European Union has no means to apply or enforce any rules on combat of money laundering (including Directive 2005/60/EC) to the Holy See and natural persons or corporate entities falling within its jurisdiction.
Against this background, the European Commission cannot take any action to apply or enforce any provisions of Directive 2005/60/EC against the AIF with regard to the IOR.
Yours sincerely.
Benjamin Angel
BRIMSTONE & CO. Attorneys & SOLICITORS 1629 K Street NW Suite 300 Washington DC 20006 USA TEL/FAX 1-202-318-2406
Commission européenne, B-1049 Bruxelles / Europese Commissie, B-1049 Brussel - Belgium. Telephone: (32-2) 299 11 11. Office: BU-1 0/034. Telephone: direct line (32-2) 296 97 85.
Ref. Ares(2012)295879 - 13/03/2012
BRIMSTONE& GO.
JONATHAN LEVY1€.29 K STREET NW SUITE 3OO
Y:T;HT|;;:""'"'T;.'jcHAM B E Rs@ en t rrsroN EAN DcoM PANY'coM
MaY 28, 2012
European CommissionDirectorate General for Economic and Financial Affairs
Financial Stability & Monetary AffairsFinancial Institutions & Financial Stability
Head of Unit - Mr. Benjamin Angel
B-1 049 Brussels, Belgium
Fax: (+32)229 809 98
Via Fax, Email and Mail
Inre: (Vatican) AutoriL'i di lnformazioneFinanziaria (AIF) a n];nra191
Monetary Agreement and European commission Letter of March 13,2012
Dear Mr. Angel:
we have thoroughly researched your letter of March 13,2012 and believe
it contains an impoitant factual erTor upon wh.ich the resolution of this
matter hinges - the juridic status and citizenship of the Istituto per le Opere
di Retigione alsotiown as the IOR. Therefore we have foregone filing a
Co*piu-, for failure to Act with the EU Court in favor of requesting that
yoor.roosideryourfrndinginlightoftheevidenceherein'
In your March 13 ,2012 letter (attached) you explain that the IoR is outside
the jurisdiction of Dire"tit e XiOStOOIEb because it belongs to th9 tt9!y f ee
and not the Vatican City Sttt . This being significant because the EU has
no agreement with the HolY See'
Whileweappreciatethelogicofthisargumen!flgtuallyitisincorrect.The IOR is under the jurisdiction of the Vatican City State' The IOR is a
juridical person of the Vatican City State. To prove ttris point, I am
attaching sworn affidavits by Awocato Franzo Grande Stevens' the Italian
afforney for the IOR and ttre Vatican City State and Professor Caridi whose
opi"io" on this maffer was cornmissioned by the IOR through its attorney
Mr. Lena. Both caridi and Stevens have testified the IoR is directly
connected to the Vatican City State'
The Declaration of Franzo Grande Stevens
The declaration of Stevens is both authoritative and binding on the IOR as
Stevens is or was the attorney for the State of Vatican City and the Vatican
Bank (IoR). The most salient paragraphs of this declaration state:
1. Stevens has been the attorney for both the IOR and Vatican City State'
10. The IoR is created under the laws of the Vatican city State
11. The IOR carries out a mission and goals on behalf of the Vatican Clty
State.
14. The President of the IoR reports to the Pope's Highest Temporal
Authority in the Vatican City State'
15. The IoR operates in the territory of the vatican city state'
lT.TheloRfundstheVaticanCityState'sgovernment.
While the IOR does perfonn some financial services for the Holy See'
Stevens does not indicate that the lORbelongs to the Holy See but instead
thatitiscloselyconnectedtotheVaticanCityState.
TheDeclaretionofProfessorSettimoCaridi
The declaration of Professor Caridi was commissioned by the IOR's
American attorney, Mr. Jeffrey Lena" to provide expert legal opinion on
the juridic status oitrr. IoR. The key paragraphs are as follows:
31. The IoR is apparently a dual entity of the Holy See and vatican city
State: "The IORil a pubiic juridic person constituted by thc authority of
the sovereigr in conformitawith the canon law, the law of the Holy See
and the law of the State of Vatican City'"
37. As a dual entity, the IoR serves both the Holy see and Vatican city
State : "The tnstituie can accept deposits of assets from entities or
individuals of the Holy See orof the state of vatican city."
38. The IOR is a fiduciary of both the Holy See and Vatican City State'
40. The IOR is located in Vatican City'
57. The IOR is an autonomous juridic person.
CONCLUSION
The testimony of Stevens under penalty of perjury must be considered
binding on the IOR as Stevens made this affidavit in his official capacity as
auornJy for the IOR and Vatican City State. A position he held for fifteen
years prior to the affidavit berng executed'
The Carridi testimony is expert opinion not sworn testimony but should be
considered persuasivl with the Steven's testimony taking prededence in
the event of a disPute-
Therefore we request the following:
1. The EU Commission amends its frnding of March 13,2012 that the IOR
"belongs to the Holy See" and find instead that the IOR is tmder the dual
jurisdiction of the Vatican City State'
2. TheEU Commission make available its good ofiices to insure the
vatican AIF responds to a more detailed money laundering complaint we
will be filing.
Sincerely,
Dr. Jonathan LevY
Attorney and Solicitor for Holocaust Survivors and Organizations:
Dr. Milan Bates, william Dorich, Vojislav Poduda, Jasenovac Memorial
Center, Independent Council of Serbian Rom4 Republik Srpska Krajina in
Exile et al.
EUROPEAN COMMISSION DIRECTORATE GENERAL ECONOMIC AND FINANCIAL AFFAIRS Financial stability and monetary affairs Financial institutions stability mechanisms Head of Unit
Brussels, ECFIN/E3/RV (2012)
DG ECFIN
1 3 03 2012 ares
Subject: Your letter of 10 February 2012 regarding the EU/Vatican Monetary Agreeement and Directive 2005/60/EC to be applied by the Vatican Autorita di Informazione Finanziaria
Dear Mr. Levy,
Thank you very much for your letter of 10 February 2012, by which you refer to previous correspondence with
regard to the above issue and ask the European Commission to take appropriate action.
The concerns raised and repeated in your letters were largely addressed in our previous correspondence to
which I would like to refer.
As to your request that the European Commission take action against the Vatican Autorita di Informazione Fi-
nanziaria (hereafter AIF) with regard to Directive 2005/60/EC and potential money laundering by the Istituto
per le Opere di Religione (hereafter IOR), the following has to be understood: The European Union has signed
a monetary agreement with the Vatican City State, which set up the AIF in 2011. By means of the Monetary
Agreement, the provisions of Directive 2005/60/EC apply to the AIF within the jurisdiction of the Vatican City
State. The 10R, however, does not fall within the jurisdiction of the Vatican City State but belongs to the Holy See, which is a different entity under international public law. It must be understood that the Holy See and the
European Union have not signed whatsoever agreement on the application of Directive 2005/60/EC or any oth-
er legal instrument to combat money laundering. Therefore, the European Union has no means to apply or en-
force any rules on combat of money laundering (including Directive 2005/60/EC) to the Holy See and natural
persons or corporate entities falling within its jurisdiction.
Against this background, the European Commission cannot take any action to apply or enforce any provisions
of Directive 2005/60/EC against the AIF with regard to the 10R.
Yours sincerely,
Benjamin Angel
BRIMSTONE & CO. Attorneys & SOLICITORS 1629 K Street NW Suite 300 Washington DC 20006 USA TEL/FAX 1-202-318-2406
Commission europeenne, B-1049 Bruxelles / Europese Commissie, B-1049 Brussel - Belgium. Telephone: (32-2) 299 11 11. Office: BU-1 0/034. Telephone: direct line (32-2) 296 97 85.
I
2
3
4
5
6
7
E
9
l0
l l
T2
l3
t4
l5
17
l8
19
20
2 l
22
24
25
26
2'l
28
i.K"3'""i"13[i trSf; i 9n3l3u*"I 152 Kcith AvenueBcrkclcv, CA. 94708'1607TeteDhone; (510) 665 l7l3facsi i l i le: (510) 665 1?12'friiiiiii
iiiii ii arl"nses' jur isdiaional or ot herw ise)
Atlomey for INST1TUTE FOR RELIGIOUS WORKS
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CAI-IFORNIA
EMIL ALPEzuN' Ct AI,
Plaintiffs'
vs.
VATICAN BANK (INSTITUTE OFRELICIOUS wOI{KS)' et al'
Case No. C 99-4941 MMC
DECTARATION OF AWOCATO
:IS3B'"5$'83#$"KI" -H' "Hii${'$3"?'#liS nn-*'oCOMPI,AINT
Defcnd!nts,
l, Ar r'. Fralzo Grande Stevens' hereby declare as follows:
I. I am a.n Attorney lic-4nced to practioe at the bar ofTulin' ltaly as well as et the ltalian Supreme
court in Rome. I have been ihe President ofthe National Forensic Bosrd (i e Chairman ofthc ltallan
Bar), For arcund fiffeen yea$, I have been the attomey for the State ofvatican City (the Holy See)' 8nd
rhe lOR, My present wotk address is: viadel Carmine 2' Tudn' ltaly' My Romc officc addrets is via
Ca$iodoro 15, Rome' ItaIY'
2. Exccpt as to those mattsrs $atcd on irformatiod and bcliof' the facts contaitcd in this
decla.ratio! are based on my personal knowledge' ard jfcalled as a witness I could testify competently to
said facts,
\\0\ 1120s
I
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
l0
t2
l l
l 5
t7
I8
I9
20
2 l
22
25
26
2'7
28
3. I am ditectly familiar with the tegal struclure and the practiccs ofthe IOR' the Covernmenl of
the state ofvatican City and thc Secretary ofstate'
4. ln suppolt ofDefcndant lOR's Motion to Dismiss Plaintifls' Third Afiended Complaint' I
offer rhe following:
5. The institutional structure of thc IOR is as follows: al the head ofthe siructurc is the
Conmissione Cardinalaia, or "Cardinals' Commission"' This Commisrion is composed of five Cardinal
\.vho are appoillted by the Sovereign Pontili Thc Cardinal's Commission ofthe IOR is headed by Sodaro
Cardinal Angelo, who is presently the Secretaiy of State of tle Vatican City State- The Conunission
meets at lesst twice per yea!. The pnmary pulpose of Commissioo is to review oompliance of the IOR
with its intemal statutory nortns' ano to check on the patrimony ofthe IOR to cnsure that its asscts
.€main at a saiisfactory level. This commission also apPoints and removes members of the OversiSht
council (whose fi[tction is discussed below)'
6 The primary role of thc Cardinals' Commission is to Prcvide an ilstitutionat link betwcen the
govcrnment ofthc Vaticaq City State and the IOR for goven[ngot oversiSht pulposes over the IOR'
7. Below this level is the Direzione' ot Ditcctorate This roughly coresponds to an opetatlve
"Board of Directors"which carries on the cveryday administration of thc IOR' Thc mcmbels ofthis
boad are apPointed by th' Oversight Council $bject to approvBl ofthe Cardinsls' Cornnission This
boaJd is r€sponsible fic! the operational activities ofthe IOR'
E. This institutional relationship bctween thc Cadinals' Cotnmission' the Prlate' dnd the Board
is set fonh in fte Sovcreign Pontifls' Chirograph daled March l' 1990i the organizationat structure ofth€
IOR is given further detail in thc Sl4'r'rto' or "by'laws" dsted March I' lgg0 According to thc
Chirographs ad the by'laws, the IOR is a Canon Law Juridic PeNon' which caII be sucd in its own name
and which has its own lcgal r€Presentativ€ Nothing in the fu[darnental mission or rclationship b€tween
tbe IOR atd the Vatican City Staie Ciovcrttnent was substanidlly changed between the old and the new
legal structuje of the IOR'
9. The IOR is locstedin the vcry healt of Vatican City, in a tower near 0!e Sant' Arr'la Gate' lls
I
rN sOFpoRT-,FloRG Morlolro olsMlssdmF6FsrEvENs oEoL
-ca,4 1 MMc
I
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
l0
l l
l 2
l3
t4
l5
l6
t7
IE
r9
z0
zl
23
26
z7
2E
, l t l iFo ur , Ld !9c l
predecessor institutions were located in the sane place aDd the IOR has never had any branch office
outside ofthe Vatican City. This central and exclusive physical location reflects the fact, described
below, that the IOR performs central firancial functions for the Vatican City State Govemmenr.
10. The IOR is not a citizcn of$e United States snd is not created uoder the Iaws ofaoy fiird
cou ry (i.e. it is created under the Laws ofthe Vatican State).
I l, Thc IOR peform an essential function in the economic govedfiient ofthe State of Vatican
City. Ajnong the other bodies that perform such firnctions gre the Plefectue for Economic Affairs and
the Administration ofthe Patlimony ofthe Holy See. The IOR carries out the mission and policy go8ls of
the State of Vatican City.
12. The centra.l position ofthe IOR in the financial activity oflhe State of vatican City is
confinocd by thc Corstitulio Apostoltcd Pastor ror!.t that has provided for a Committee ofcardiaals
(hcaded by Cardinal Sodano) that has ultimate power to suPervise thc effectiveness ofthe IOR'S activily.
Anicle 24 of &at documenl, which refe6 to th€ "special institutc. ' for msnaging econornic assets
colltmittcd to it. , ," refers to thc IOR.
13. vy'hen matters come to the dttention ofthe Presideot of th€ OversiSht Counsel' Professor
Angeto caloia, or to the sftention ofth€ DiEctor Geneml commendatorE Lelio scaletti, which involve
any sort oipolicy decision, or strategic decision about the loR's activities, they ale commonly refened to
the attention ofthe Secretary ofState, who decidcs how to procced' In such cases, the IOR follo{'s, and
it has been the custom ofthe loR to follow, any advice that the secretary c.nsidcrs in the best inte!€sls
ofthe vatican Stat€. This i9 based upon my cxperienoe in working with both rcpresentatives ofthe IoR
and wilh the Secr€tarY of Stote.
14. I can also add that, whiie the day-m-day opelstions ofthe IOR are managed by the IoR i$elf
(as it is natural for ajuridical person) the custom and practice ofthe IOR is attuned and responsive to the
policy vision ofthe Searetary of State, \aho is the highest dclegate ofti€ SoveEign Pontiffs temporal
authority over Vatican City State For this reason, it is the practice of the President and Director Ccneml
ofthe IoR to report to Cardinal Sodano in his caPacity of Secletary of State and as chainnan as the
!1
l
l
5
6
7
8
9
l0
l l
l 2
I 3
I4
l 5
l 6
\7
l 8
t9
20
2 l
22
23
25
17
2t
cardinal's commission, snd to fumish him with any infomation and records that he.equires' ln this
sense, the Secreta.ry of State's function, fo! all maltels ofPanicular importance in the IOR, can t'est b€
defined as ar| active supervisory role. Hence, the Secretary ofstatc has considelable conlrol ovcr the
programrlliDg and execution oflOR activities (including budget and opetations) that he considers of
State interest.
15. The IOR oflers and p€rforms the following services to the vaticar! State a'td its temporal
head, the SovereiSn Pontiff. It acts as a clea.ring house for payments ttetween the vtrious Valican State
agencics. lt finances a vaiefy of reliSious works within the Stale It opemtcs the electronic Paymcnt a'1d
ATM network in place throughout Vatic€$ State territory' This senice is provided at less th8n cost' and
a5 a service to the Vatican State. It manages the pe$ion system for its own employces as well as all the
o6er employ€es ofthc Vaiican State. lD this way, the IOR supports the operations ofth€ Vaticsn Ciry
State in its own lenitory'
16. The structuc and regulations goveming the Pcnsion System for IOR cmPloyees and othet
valican Sta1e employees js virtually idcntical,
17. In keeping with th€ IOR'S mission ofPious purposes, at the Secretary ofState's request' lo
his capacity as tcmporal dclcgat€ ofthe Sovcrcign Pontiff, the IOR makes available to the Stat€ of
vatican City Govenunent flmds to puBuc its pious Purposes ln this sense the IOR is used to forward
the goals ofthe State of Vatican City, and to othcrwise calry out State ofvatican City foreign relations
obj€ctives.
18. At thc cnd ofeacb year, once the funds ncccssary for thc IOR'S moncy managcmcni for
pious purposes are set aside, remaining fiurds are made available to the Holy See to csrry out its goals
when fund r$anagement has not produced suJlicicnt funds' no sucb payment is made' howevcr' No profil
is kept by the IoR.
19. ltre Hoty See bas, on p€tst occasions prgvided {inancial assistance for the IOR'
20. 'Ihe IOR is a limit€d dcpo$tory institlltion lt is not open to lhe public in the sense that the
depositors a.re essentially limi(ed to Vatican State employe€s' members ofthe Holy See' religious orders'
il'
I
2
3
4
5
6
7
9
l0
l l
l 3
n
l 5
t6
t7
l8
l9
20
2 l
22
23
24
25
2'1
28
and persons who deposit rnoney destined, at least irl part' for works ofpiety'
21. It is the custom and practice ofthe IOR to not retain tecotds afterten yea$ Tlere is
presently no employee, and I know ofno person, who workcd at the IOR in the yea$ of World Wsr li'
22. The IOR is a creature of tho soverei8J'l will and could be wound up gnd its assets liquidated
by direction ofthe sovereign. According to the ChirogaPh thst has created the IoR as a Ca$o[ Iaw
juddical person, tbe IOR cannot change its bylaws. Any changes to the by-laws would orly be made with
final appmval ofthe Sovcrcign Pontiff.
23. The origin of the frlnd that gave birth to the IOR was a capilal contribulion to its sntccedent
institution, the Conn ission ad Plas Causas, cteatcd by Pope Leo XIU in 1887'
24. IOR is a Canon Law Juridic person whose fundamental pupose is to pronrote pious acts As
such, it does not manufacturc or sell any goods in either lhe State of Califomia or tbe United States' nor
docs it sell aIIy sctviccs to thc general publio in eithe' the State of Califomia o( the Uniled States'
25, IOR has no rcgistered agent for lcgal notificatio$ in either the state of califomia or the
United Slates.
26. loR has no oflices or ot$er facility of 8ny kind in eithet the State of Cdlifomig or ihe United
StAtes.
27. toR does not owa lcasc or rcnt any rcal propcrty in cither thc State ofcaliforrda or the
United States.
28. IOR has no cmployeca based in either the State of Califomia or the United Ststcs'
29. IOR conducts no advertising 8nd docs not market any products in either the State of
Califomis or the United Slates.
30' IoR has oo mailing of other addrcss' tclePhone number' telex, or fax number by which it may
be reached in eithcr thc State ofcaliforflia or the United States'
31. None oftbe members offhe board ofdirecto$ and council(charged with day-to-day
opetations) of IOR is a rssident ofeither the State of Califomia or the United States'
32. IOR does not diiect ot control the day'to-dey operations or management of any other entity
I
3
6
1
t
9
l0
u
l 3
t {' rs
l 6
IE
I9
20
22
24
25
26
2t
30.011 . i0CC l8 :335r0 665 r7r2
! . 7
tlut conduc6 bqsircrs in lhc Uoitcd Slslcs.
33, Nothtng In tbt! dqclantioa, rrhich b mad6 oDly lo rddt4i itsu6 of bj€ct mrnq ard
pcriolrl jEbdlgtion wbictr mey arisa In drc prqi€lt coltorlrsy, b mrrnt lo, ot thould bc ttk n 13,
suhnitting io &cju.idictiotr of thi! Court, o. valvilg lDy riSht to clsim govqri8t itqoroity or ![t olb.t
priYi,cges
I rl.chrc !!dcr lodry ol p.rrrry ||!d.r li. l.wr ol tt. UDlacd Sar;rt of A.cricr ahrt tba
forqo|!8 tt trur md corrart
Pr..c[lcd on 30 d.y of Orbb.n 2000 rt TEr|!' lt ly.
Avyoc.to Ftrnzi Gt|!rt! St!v!r|, Aaaomcy fo.IOR |!d Sbtc of Vrtl.r! Clry
I
2
l
a
6
1
I
I
I O
l 4
r (
t6l t
IE
l 9
is,$$iilf xtif#i;i'su*^I'.li"ff"'lHlilli'-'''T'kobdD.: (5l o) 665 1713
tfr')ni?*t1P:f :"8)"'"".)uri'!'i.'';oaotoro'1t'tui'!)
Aflornqy for tNsTlTuIE FoR R.eLtGlOUs WOITKS
UNITED STATAS DISTRICT COIJRT
NORTTIERN DTSTRICT OF CA!|fORMA
ctle No. C 99'4941 MMC
iffi$ffiuiiffid;"iiiiiiii-it r.4trrtls' rtrrtD
24
2 5
L aw.l Frurro Gr{rdg st'vcoi' hscby drcbc |r toUo!'/ri
;:;;;;aued ' p'o"ri"'
" rt' uar or rsdn' lulv ., *all o. n th' Irdrro
L -- ___- 'L' tt"d&l|r o'O' Nadonrl Forcnsic Bortd (i'' Cblitgll
,,,,"i: j;; ;;"';lo *' *'"'"'*':::::]::il: :;*: ilill:l'sEl{tdc gos$ r$ '.""* ' _-' - -
| bcco lhc tnor'y lor lbc slarc of vatic.n cary ((hr nol}
Irartco b!r) For f,round ttno!! yc&t' lbrw -^ r..;^ trrlv- Mv R!r!i otli.c ..ldrl(also P!r).
For souno u'tew '*- . l, -. ,", ur" *,
"ol:nind 2, Tlrrio, luly. My Rorli ofii.c .ddr.sr
sc(). $d ltr loR' My P!cJ'!t wotl 'ddt"t
ir vir p$riodu.6 t5. Rooc' fttly ,r- ri{r c66t.1ncd in lhir'' ' ''
ia u"t+t tt ro *oie mlttr'! lrertd oo intol"o'rlon lrlil bcli'li tb! f4rtr coltrrtrc
*,,,-[;;;;" rov pflond Lnowlcdgc' lnd !f cdlcd 6] 6 *'ib'e5 I could rcitifv Gom9"'ntlv to
rod ftts.28
$I'8H3S3ilHi,T,".i"" "'
tt0v 1i 2000
5
7
8
9
lo
l t
l3
l4
l 5
l5
l 8
l 9
zo
ZI
21
2t
26
28
3 | .m dilccrty funili$ r.,irb tlr l.gal lrflsiutr anC tlo pr..riccr ot dr tOR, lh. covalD!|.rt o,$! Sir^ra ot vdicr$ City |nd tha S.(r!tr y of St|t4.
4. 16 c'rPpol ofDcf€nd&t IOR'! Molion ro Dilrnis! PlEinnffr, Third /JlEndcd Corplatll, I
otfcr rbc folloe/in8:
S. Tb. puqrog! of tbi. &.lrrlrop ir lo plgvid€ funhor inforo.rion rctlicd rr, rh. cq.rporirio, ot
bt lOA.'t Conmirt:on. Cardhalizie, ot'!cr!dln b ' Corrurirsion" rcferled ro in roy Dcchr|tto{ ot
Av! 0!116 Ft4olo Cunda St.vror ln Suppofl ot Dcf.nd!,rr IOR'J Morjoo !o DiirDt3r Plrisrdf!' ?bird
A.rnond.d Compl.irl rnd lh particrdlr ro d.tdl th! dcnp i!rritutioaat linb bcrefccn thc IOR'3 C!di!dr'
CoEsoi.riot gDd rhs Sov.ruocar of Ar st.ra of Vadc|! Cry rncnlioncd ia lrn|$rgh 6 of Iny Fevio{t
drclrrdon.
6. Ofrlr 6v! rrcmbcr, ottb IOR'I cordlndt' Cos|tni$ion, rhc firrl. Atlt.lo C.dl6.l
Sodalo, ii laror|! tl|! 3ir hllboir rad.iAg c{dlaCa in $. co.dindt' ColhS€. b ll|G S.crctdrt 6t s(.ic
ol tlu Sr{r. V!.ior! Clly,.nd i. | !u.nb.r of C& Cosrlcit ofcrrilirrl| qnd 8i3hoF! (Codirlr, di
cardinati . Vct.cvi) ot lhc Soctarsy of 3 c'r Offlc., tlt conSrltsliou fo! th. Docttit!' of thc Faltlr
!h. Conir.grtion otEilboPr ud iha Confrslotion tor E st!l! Chrrch't Tht rc'9nd, Jobn Jo"Pb
Crrihd O'Coaror, wA!, lsrtl hh t!..n! d.!t!, . |nrftb.! ot th. Ccuacil tot $. Study of
Orllrlrt||ond &d Eco{lomF Prlbletlt of tlF Holy s'c' tdr a tncmbr' of Ib! Coi'|rcil o( cddin'ls !d
listrop! {,rthio tl* s..tEt{ry ofsLr|! t Ofrt..'.Dd 'lro h'ld biSb officd wilhio tbt Rotlto Ct|!ld"
CorftrcllrloE to! 6&rte$ Clrutch.r (Con8t<ta!"tt P't l2 Chi'* O'itnull) Rcc'ntlv' Ad!'n C|tdind
,oadpb Mrldr wtlr na.oltl to tlcracd bim on 'h! 'forn6tiot!'d Comtri..lotl 't Crdfurd! c$ditul
M.id., AJcbbirhoP otDcaort' tt t ErDlc' ot llr CoDstognioo tor !h! Chtty' qr' CohStta'tio! for
cuholis Edoc lon .rd tb, Pocfificrl Cbutl'il to( tb! P'ilgnl Crft of Mfur'di 'nd lrin'iltt P'6Pl''
Tl$ Olrd, Cr.to C..dln.l t'||5.o, l. . n tnirt otth' cosndl of C$4rndr anC qirhoPi ['i$in rt'
Sc(:rct|.y r.,! S.atc't Otric!, ud rlo holdr hir! offcG sithjr t'b' Ronlrn C\rlir'i Conlrcguion fo'
E$t trl ch!rcb.!. TDr fcs{rh. 8st|lo Jor' C|.dllrl cblltl'r t''ts' ii I m'hbcr ot thc council of
ca(dinatt and BithoP vi$in Uc 9€drEtrry of Srqp'r O!ft'c' and dro bctd bi8h gJncr !'ith!r tJ|E Ron l
siu@ "il-|.lm-
I
3
5
6
7
E
9
to
l t
r3
l 4
l3
l6
l 8
t9
20
, l
23
2S
26
n2E
Curi.'1 CongEtadon for th! ldtlt{Gr of Con!'cd'd Lrf itd lhc So!i'!v for aPottolic Lifc
\Co,'tra6{zti''tz P.t lli lt kun di Vits C-n'ecrer. c L' Scci''e' At Uta APorroti'alr Thc 6frh 8du'rdo
csflUd.l Mrrdns goltulo, Ptcf.cr lor l! Contlssitioo tbr lnrdtuct of Cohrect|r'4 Lif' $d for
Socicriar of Aposloltc Llfc' b n nEmb$ of t}!€ Corncrt of C'Jdinrlt cJ|d BishoPs wit'bit rlte sicrcl.ty of
sr4E's Omc!, lrd .lto bctd bill oficc withb thc Holy St' |9 ' ft"lb'r df lht cosncll lo lb' Scctchrv
C.nrfll flf rhc Slnod ot Biiborg.
?. In tutDm.rr, rll tivc dtttrbct! (ifolt co||nti tb' lo!8_!lrhg' b{r' t'4dDtly 'Lct'ttd C|rdinrl
o'Co!Dor), hrve bccn !t rDbar| ot 0lr sccrtnry 6f Sl.'e'e rircnty'n^'o trlcr|$Gr Couocil of BishoPi tnd
Cd'illnlh, olc tr|.mblr it ttl! scrlltlsy of Std!' ud dl hold hiBh ofice cls€v''lE c $rioi! rbc tloly sca
or drc Rur'lt|l Curlr lo rddirion to rtdr 44i'c ln th! Otfic' of lhc S'crlliry ot strt' tttdrct rht IOR'
8' Tbit dlar mry b, cooti'ptd by 'on'olti!8 ot rb A'f,nttt'io Pon'ltcto 2@ 'Po^rtl.ic^l
Atrt.Usl.2ooo}.wbich6tbc!t!Dd.rdcornPrEhcDiivctlfgFDcewo.kpllblirhcdbyo|cl|olyscc
(PubUshct: Llbcrfu Valicsrls,2cfl], to dB'db' tfu otliccs und Pcdo trl of lh! st*! of Varic'$ Cilv rdd
thc world-$,ldc Rotll{l C{holic Chur.h'
t.lo4at3 ultlct ltco.lrt oft tjurt und" ric lrwJ ot thc Ulttd SrlI€ ot Amlrl" lfi't 3hc
lon'lolng b fruc.nd cotltcl' lvo kalrtL,
j.:tt:"t.,t 1. an -Oc'..."*y or O...irt,2m ta Tuttn, ll.ly'
Awoatto F rnro Grudo Slrvalr'ton .|!d Sr{rr of v llrn cttY
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Jeffrey S. Lena SBN 189900LAW OFFICES OF JEFFREY S. LENA1152 Keith AvenueBerkeley, California 94708-1607Telephone: (510) 665-1713Facsimile: (510) 588-5555E-mail: [email protected](Without waiver of defenses, jurisdictional or otherwise)
Attorney for Istituto per le Opere di Religione (IOR)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
EMIL ALPERIN, et al.,
Plaintiffs,
vs.
VATICAN BANK, a/k/a INSTITUTE OFRELIGIOUS WORKS or ISTITUTO PER LEOPERE DI RELIGIONE (IOR), et al.,
Defendants.
Case No. C 99-04941 MMC (EDL)
DECLARATION OF PROFESSORSETTIMIO CARMIGNANI CARIDI INSUPPORT OF DEFENDANT IOR’SMOTION TO DISMISS FOURTHAMENDED COMPLAINT FOR LACKOF SUBJECT MATTERJURISDICTION
Date: July 28, 2006
Time: 9:00 a.m.
Court: The Honorable Maxine M. Chesney
I, Professor Settimio Carmignani Caridi, do hereby declare and state as follows:
Introduction
1. My name is Settimio Carmignani Caridi. I am a tenured Ricercatore (Researcher) and member
of the faculty of law at the Italian University of Rome, Tor Vergata. My business address is Settimio Caridi,
Department of Public Law, Faculty of Law, Università di Roma Tor Vergata, Via Orazio Raimondo, 18,
00173, Rome, Italy.
2. As set forth below, this declaration is based upon my expert knowledge of civil law legal
systems, Italian law, canon law, ecclesiastical law, the constitutional law of the Holy See and the particular
laws of the State of Vatican City.
Case 3:99-cv-04941-MMC Document 273 Filed 03/20/2006 Page 1 of 20
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28 Decl. of Settimio Carmignani Caridi in Supp. of IOR’s Mtn. to Dismiss 4th Amended Cmplt.
Alperin v. IOR, Case No. C 99-04941 MMC (EDL) 2
Qualifications and Professional Experience
3. I am trained and teach in the disciplines of canon law, ecclesiastical law, Italian law, and the
various laws that make up the legal system governed by the Holy See. I am familiar with all of the
international accords between Italy and the Holy See. I am familiar with the international law principles of
sovereign immunity and have studied on a sustained basis sovereign immunity cases in both the United States
and Italy. I study comparative law and conflict of laws. I am familiar with the differences between the civil
law and the common law. I am a licensed lawyer in good standing in Italy.
4. Italian is my native language. As a legal professional and scholar, I work primarily in Latin
and Italian, but I read and follow relevant scholarship written in English, French and Spanish.
Academic Degrees
5. In 1979, I graduated with honours from the Law Faculty of the Italian University of Rome,
La Sapienza, where I received a perfect examination score (High Honors) defending my ecclesiastical law
thesis titled “Relations between State and Church in Polish Democratic Republic” under the direction of
Professor of Ecclesiastical Law, Pietro Gismondi.
6. In 1982, I received my Licentia in Iure Canonico, magna cum laude (Canon Law License)
at Gregorian Pontifical University, where I submitted a canon law thesis related to the development of the
moral subject in the decisions of Sacra Congregazione del Concilio.
7. In 1987, I received my doctoral degree in canon and ecclesiastical law, for which I wrote a
dissertation on entities of the Roman Curia and State of Vatican City, “Criteri di distinzione tra organi ed
enti della Curia e dello S.C.V.”
Academic and Professional Activities
8. From 1980 until 1992, I worked at the Supreme Court of Cassation (Italian court of last resort
for non-constitutional matters) in a research group called the Giurinform Studio, assigned to analyze case
law for the Court. I also received funding research in the same period from the Consiglio Nazionale delle
Ricerche (National Research Council), attached to the Ministry of Education and Italian University Ministry
Case 3:99-cv-04941-MMC Document 273 Filed 03/20/2006 Page 2 of 20
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28 Decl. of Settimio Carmignani Caridi in Supp. of IOR’s Mtn. to Dismiss 4th Amended Cmplt.
Alperin v. IOR, Case No. C 99-04941 MMC (EDL) 3
under the direction of Professors Gismondi, Ferrari, Mirabelli, Talmanca, Corecco, Mauro, Spinelli, Dalla
Torre, and Milano.
9. In 1982, I was awarded a three-year scholarship with stipend by the Catholic University
Centre by the Episcopal Conference of Italian Bishops, after which I received my doctorate from the Ministry
of Italian Universities.
10. In 1987, I won a public competition to become Researcher in canon law and ecclesiastical law
at the public University of Rome Tor Vergata, where I continue to teach.
11. For ten years, from November 21, 1991 to November 22, 2001, I served as Clerk on the
Italian Constitutional Court to the Honorable Justice Cesare Mirabelli, performing tasks similar to those
performed by clerks to Justices of the United States Supreme Court – research, writing, and preparation of
memoranda. After Professor Mirabelli was made Chief Justice, I also coordinated work for the assistant
clerks.
12. I am General Secretary of Consociatio Internationalis Studio Iuris Canonici Promovendo,
an international association of more than 500 canon law professors, mainly laymen, where my duties include
the responsiblity for the agenda for that organization’s triennial meetings.
13. I am a member of the board of editors for Quaderni di Diritto e Politica Ecclesiastica, a
journal of law and ecclesiastical politics.
14. I teach general law courses, as well as courses at the masters level and specialty courses, in
public administration, communications and legal information systems.
15. I am member of the Ordine degli Avvocati (the Italian public law register of attorneys), and
am admitted to practice before the Italian Supreme Court of Cassation, the Italian Constitutional Court (court
with jurisdiction over constitutional questions), the Consiglio di Stato (court of administrative recourse from
first instance administrative law decisions), and the Corte dei Conti (court receiving challenges relating to
the accuracy of public accounts and expenditure).
\ \ \
\ \ \
Case 3:99-cv-04941-MMC Document 273 Filed 03/20/2006 Page 3 of 20
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28 Decl. of Settimio Carmignani Caridi in Supp. of IOR’s Mtn. to Dismiss 4th Amended Cmplt.
Alperin v. IOR, Case No. C 99-04941 MMC (EDL) 4
Subject Matter of this Declaration
16. Based upon my expert knowledge of the legal systems applicable within the Holy See and
upon the territory of the State of Vatican City, defendant Istituto per le Opere di Religione (“IOR”) has
asked me to give my expert opinion on, principally, the legal status of the IOR in the year 1999.
Materials Reviewed to Make this Declaration
17. I am familiar with all of the leading scholarly publications relating to the Holy See, the
territory of the State of Vatican City, the canon law, Italian ecclesiastical law, and international law. All of
the materials I rely upon to make this declaration are publicly available, and are not based upon any special
access to documents or relation to any of the juridical subjects described herein. The most important materials
I have reviewed are the following:
The Fourth Amended Complaint in the case of Alperin v. Vatican Bank.
Costituzione Apostolica Pastor Bonus (June 28, 1988) 80 Acta Apostolica Sedis (“AAS”)841-930 (1988), in Commento alla Pastor Bonus e alle norme Sussidiarie della CuriaRomana, P. Pinto ed., Città del Vaticano, Libreria Editria Vaticana (2003) (“Pastor Bonus”).
Costituzione Apostolica Regimini Ecclesiae Universae (Aug. 15, 1967) 59 AAS 885-928(1967).
Codice di Diritto Canonico (Jan. 25, 1983), in Commento al Codice di Diritto Canonico, P.Pinto ed., Città del Vaticano, Libreria Editria Vaticana, (2001) (“1983 CODE”).
Trattato Laterano (Feb. 11, 1929) 6 AAS 209-271 (1929) (“Lateran Treaty”).
Legge Vaticana 26 novembre 2000, Legge fondamentale dello Stato della Citta’ delVaticano [Law of Nov. 26, 2000, Fundamental Law of the State of Vatican City], in forceas of Feb. 22, 2001.
Legge Vaticana 7 giugno 1929, n. II, Legge sulle fonti del Diritto.
Regolamento Generale della Curia Romana (Secretaria Status, Rescriptum ex AudientiaSS.MI quo Ordinatio generalis Romanae Curiae foras datur) (Apr. 30, 1999).
La Curia Romana: Lineamenti Storico Giuridici, Niccolo’ Del Re, Città del Vaticano,Libreria Editrice Vaticana (4th ed. 1998).
Il Diritto Amministrativo della Chiesa, Francesco D’Ostilio, Città del Vaticano, LibreriaEditrice Vaticana (2d ed. 1996).
Diritto dell’Organizzazione Ecclesiastica, Juan Ignacio Arieta, Milano, Giufrè Editore(1997).
Case 3:99-cv-04941-MMC Document 273 Filed 03/20/2006 Page 4 of 20
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28 Decl. of Settimio Carmignani Caridi in Supp. of IOR’s Mtn. to Dismiss 4th Amended Cmplt.
Alperin v. IOR, Case No. C 99-04941 MMC (EDL) 5
Chirographum quo nova ordinatio datur Organismo Istituto per le Opere di Religione (Mar.1, 1990).
Adnexum Statuto, Istituto per le Opere di Religione (Annex to 1990 Chirograph of Mar. 1,1990).
Costituzioni Generali e Statuti Generali, Ordine Dei Frati Minori (Dec. 8, 2004) (“Cost. Gen.”).
Slavorum Gentem: Quibus extinguitur Capitulum Ecclesiae Collegiatae S. HieronymiIllyricorum et Collegium Hieronymianum in Urbe erigitur (Aug. 1, 1901).
Regolamento generale per il Vicariato di Roma (July 1, 2000).
Publications
18. I publish scholarly articles in peer-reviewed journals on Italian law, canon law, the law of the
Holy See, international law, sovereignty, and representational capacity (agency). A partial list of my
publications is set forth in Attachment A to this declaration.
Introductory Notes
19. The following notations state important premises related to the contents of this declaration.
Note on the Importance of Reference to Latin Texts to Analyze Law
20. Latin is the official language of the Holy See, and legal texts of the first order are published
in Latin. These Latin texts are the authoritative source of law. For this reason, all translations relied upon
by a scholar must be compared to the original Latin text to determine the translation’s accuracy. With respect
to the documents whose authoritative texts are in Latin, I have made the necessary comparisons before
executing this declaration.
Legal Status of Expert Opinion
21. This declaration states my expert legal opinion. I am not an employee (dipendente) of the
Holy See and have no association with the IOR. Nor do I have any association with the Order of Friars
Minor, or the College of San Girolamo. This declaration is not an official statement of the Holy See or the
IOR, or any other entity. In the legal system of the Holy See, official statements of law are reserved to those
organs constitutionally empowered to make such statements.
Concept of Canon Law
22. Canon law, broadly construed, refers to that body of laws governing the legal relations of real
Case 3:99-cv-04941-MMC Document 273 Filed 03/20/2006 Page 5 of 20
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28 Decl. of Settimio Carmignani Caridi in Supp. of IOR’s Mtn. to Dismiss 4th Amended Cmplt.
Alperin v. IOR, Case No. C 99-04941 MMC (EDL) 6
and fictitious persons in the canon law legal system, and describes the legal institutes that form that system.
The term does not simply refer to the “Code of Canon Law,” which provides the general structure for the
legal system within which “particular,” “special” and “constitutional” laws may also be elaborated. See, e.g.,
1983 CODE c.5 (Code of Canon Law in force suppresses prior codes, but allows creation of law interstitial
to the Code); 1983 CODE c.360 (stating that the Pope conducts affairs through the Roman Curia, which acts
in the name of and on behalf of the Pope, according to the norms of canon law and such particular laws as
may be enacted; the Roman Curia is composed of the Secretary of State and other Curial entities as
determined by statute and special laws); Pastor Bonus, passim (Papal constitution authorizing and describing
components of the Roman Curia); 1983 CODE c.455 (Episcopal Conferences elaborate their own norms,
subject to their compliance with the canon law); 1983 CODE c.598 (religious institutes establish activities
through their own constitutional structures). These laws are interpreted according to the hierarchical status
of the law, the principle of subsidiarity, the principles of statutory interpretation used in the legal system, and
the canon law’s received tradition. 1983 CODE c.6, § 2 .
Authority and Constitutional Expression in the Holy See's Legal System,and on the Territory of the State of Vatican City
23. The Holy See is a sovereign confessional state governed by canon law and constitutional law.
Its sovereignty is recognized by other states throughout the world, including the United States. The polticial
form of the state is a monarchy. See 1983 CODE c.331-335.
24. Although the Holy See’s power is concentrated in the figure of the monarch, it is organized
through a stable, cognizable and predictable legal system whose institutional instrument is the Roman Curia
and certain Vatican state institutions. 1983 CODE c.360; Pastor Bonus art. 2, et seq.; see also, Nuova Legge
Fondamentale dello Stato della Citta’ del Vaticano (26 Nov. 2000) (in effect Feb. 22, 2001) (stating the law
of the State of Vatican City currently in force, but making no change from the previous law relevant to this
declaration). The elaboration and exercise of this power adheres to the principle of legality: powers within
the Curia are based upon written documents and the division of authority into executive, legislative and
judicial functions, each maintaining legally mandated degrees of separation. Judicial officers cannot make
law, legislative officers cannot adjudicate cases, and executive officers generally exercise administrative rather
Case 3:99-cv-04941-MMC Document 273 Filed 03/20/2006 Page 6 of 20
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28 Decl. of Settimio Carmignani Caridi in Supp. of IOR’s Mtn. to Dismiss 4th Amended Cmplt.
Alperin v. IOR, Case No. C 99-04941 MMC (EDL) 7
than legislative and judicial functions. The right to challenge administrative decisions (“recourses”) and appeal
judicial decisions include de novo review of issues of both fact and law. See Pastor Bonus, passim
(describing the modern configuration of executive, legislative and judicial institutions within the Curia and
the limitations on the competencies and jurisdiction of each); Del Re, Curia Romana 95-108 (describing
congregations of the Roman Curia); and D’Ostilio, Diritto Amministrativo, 157-163 (describing curial
organizations generally and limitations of competence of administrative agencies of the Roman Curia).
Juridic Persons
25. A general analogy between juridic persons in the civil law tradition and corporations in the
common law legal tradition may be useful. A “juridic person” is a “fictitious” rather than a “natural” person
and is similar to a “corporation” that is created for some particular purpose, as may be defined in the founding
documents and further elaborated in its “by-laws” describing the corporate structure and function. Like the
common law corporation, the juridic person is a legal mechanism through which organizations maintain a
separate identity, structure, purpose, and legal independence.
26. Juridic persons are also classified as either “public” or “private.”
27. In the canon law, a public juridic person is an entity that comes into existence either ipso iure
or is created by the specific grant of the competent authority. In either case, the entity’s legal purpose must
include a mandate to pursue canonically appropriate public good. Public juridic persons are subject to the
scrutiny of the creating authority, but act autonomously within the sphere of their competence, as defined
by the juridic person’s own statutes and the grant of authority. 1983 CODE c.114, § 1 (providing that juridic
persons may be created by a disposition of law, or by specific legal decree, by a competent authority and with
a purpose that corresponds with the mission of the competent authority). The Code specifies that a public
juridic person maintains a particularly close relationship to the competent authority that created it in order
the public juridic person can be supervised to ensure that the public good is pursued. See, e.g., 1983 CODE
c.116.
28. The separate status of juridic persons is maintained through the creation of autonomous
governing boards and regulations. This rule is uniform, but applied through different parts of the canon law,
Case 3:99-cv-04941-MMC Document 273 Filed 03/20/2006 Page 7 of 20
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28 Decl. of Settimio Carmignani Caridi in Supp. of IOR’s Mtn. to Dismiss 4th Amended Cmplt.
Alperin v. IOR, Case No. C 99-04941 MMC (EDL) 8
depending upon the nature of the institution. See, e.g., 1983 CODE c.587 (institutes adopt “fundamental”
norms relative to their internal governance and the activities of its members); Regolamento generale per il
Vicariato di Roma, July 1, 2000 (setting forth regulations for the vicariate of Rome separate and distinct from
those applicable to the Roman Curia); 1983 CODE c.243 (religioius seminaries each adopt their own
regulations according to the competent authority); 1983 CODE c.454-455 (episcopal conferences may make
law not inconsistent with the Code of Canon Law); 1983 CODE c.573 (bishops are individually responsible
for the administration of their own dioceses).
29. The sovereign’s powers are divided into pastoral, spiritual and temporal spheres. Temporal
authority concerns the acquisition, retention, administration, and alienation of temporal goods. These powers
are exercised by the various juridic persons within the Church, independently of the competent authority that
created them, within the limits set by their founding statutes. Such canon law juridic persons are also typified
by separate legal representation, and the power to represent and vindicate the rights of the juridic entity.
30. Juridic persons are first classified into two basic categories: aggregates of persons
(universitates personarum) or of things (universitates rerum). 1983 CODE c.113. The competent authority
– here, the sovereign – may create either.
Legal Status of the IOR as of the Year 1999
31. The IOR is a public juridic person constituted by the authority of the sovereign in conformity
with the canon law, the law of the Holy See and the law of the the State of Vatican City. The legal status
of the IOR is described in both sovereign law and legal commentary. See, e.g., F. Finocchiaro, Diritto
ecclesiastico 179 (Bologna 1986) (general overview of ecclesiastical law describing IOR); S. Lariccia, Diritto
ecclesiastico 155 (3d ed. Padova 1986) (same); E. Vitali, L’istituto per le opere di religione e il diritto
italiano, in GIUR. COMM. 514-28 (1987); F. Margiotta Broglio, Enti centrali della chiesa e istituto per le
opere di religione. Considerazioni sull’interpretazione dell’art. 11 del Trattato Lateranense, in RIV. TRIM.
DIR. E PROC. CIV. 543-53 (1988); F. Finocchiaro, Enti centrali della chiesa cattolica, in XII ENC. GIUR.
TRECCANI 1-6; G. Dalla Torre, Santa Sede e Enti Centrali Della Chiesa, in XIII DIGESTO ITALIANO,
Discipline Pubblicistiche 589-598.
Case 3:99-cv-04941-MMC Document 273 Filed 03/20/2006 Page 8 of 20
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
A chirograph is a traditionally handwritten instrument through which the Pontiff expresses his will.1
In the Holy See’s legal system, the papal chirograph is law.
“[T]he procedure for approval [of a juridic person’s statutes] implies and means a control, on the2
part of the administrative authority (in a position of preeminence and prevalence), of the activity carried outby another subject (in a position of subordination), for the ends and within the bounds fixed by law.” IExegetical Commentary on the Code of Canon Law 773 (Marzoa, et al. eds.).
Decl. of Settimio Carmignani Caridi in Supp. of IOR’s Mtn. to Dismiss 4th Amended Cmplt.
Alperin v. IOR, Case No. C 99-04941 MMC (EDL) 9
32. As the governing (“competent”) authority of the Holy See, the Pope authorizes the creation
of new juridic persons on Vatican City State territory. On March 1, 1990, Pope John Paul II issued a
chirograph (“Chirograph”) and internal governing regulations (“Statuto”) giving the IOR its present form1
as a public juridic person. See 82 AAS 1619-20 (Chirographum quo nova ordinatio datur Organismo
Istituto per le Opere di Religione (Chirograph)), 82 AAS 1621-29 (Adnexum Statuto, Istituto per le Opere
di Religione (Statuto)) (1990).
33. As demonstrated by the content of the Chirograph and the Statuto, the IOR was not created
by operation of a general law, and was not part of a general legislative scheme. Rather, it was created by and
is subject to a “special law” specifically directed at the IOR’s creation and organization, and commanding
the IOR to engage in activity of public benefit to the sovereign. Chirograph, Statuto, passim; Pastor Bonus
art. 25, § 2 (describing the IOR as an institute governed by “special law”). The sovereign was the original2
source of funds to establish and finance the operation of the IOR.
34. As a public juridic person with a mission defined by the sovereign, the IOR has the capacity
and obligation to serve the public purposes set forth in its authorizing legal instrument. See, e.g., Statuto art.
5 (providing that the IOR serve sovereign-mandated goals with oversight by a Commission of Cardinals
appointed by the sovereign).
35. While juridically separate from the sovereign, the IOR is a creature of the sovereign; it is
neither a citizen of the United States, nor it is created under the laws of any third country. See Italian
Supreme Court of Cassation, Section V, 17 July 1987, n.3932 (acknowledging location of IOR on Vatican
City State territory; its formation under the laws of the Holy See and the Vatican City State; and its immunity
from the jurisdiction of Italian courts).
Case 3:99-cv-04941-MMC Document 273 Filed 03/20/2006 Page 9 of 20
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28 Decl. of Settimio Carmignani Caridi in Supp. of IOR’s Mtn. to Dismiss 4th Amended Cmplt.
Alperin v. IOR, Case No. C 99-04941 MMC (EDL) 10
36. The purpose of the IOR is to carry on activities that are pias causas, or for pious purposes,
consistent with the sovereign’s public purposes. See, e.g., Statuto, passim (internal governing regulations
of the IOR requiring it to act for pias causas, a Holy See public purpose). The IOR cannot change its rules
of internal governance without permission of and final approval by the sovereign. Chirograph (creating IOR
as a canon law juridic person, limiting its authority to public acts, and requiring that all changes to the
governing statute be made by the sovereign, not the entity itself).
37. The IOR’s public purpose is to “provide custody and administration of movables and
immovables transferred or entrusted to the same institute for the purpose of works of religion and charity.”
Statuto art. 2, § 1. In conformity with its purpose, “[t]he Institute therefore accepts assets whose destination
is at least in part or in the future that of the previous section. The Institute can accept deposits of assets from
entities or individuals of the Holy See or of the State of Vatican City.” Id. at § 2.
38. As a public juridic person, the Statuto authorizes the IOR to acts as a fiduciary of the
deposited funds for designated pious purposes, and as an autonomous pious foundation that directly carries
out the charitable purposes of the Holy See and the State of Vatican City.
39. Constitutional documents underscore the IOR’s central institutional relationship with the Holy
See, and its public purpose. Pastor Bonus art. 25, § 2, describes the IOR as that “special institute established
and located within the Vatican State for managing economic assets committed to it and for administering
those that serve to sustain works of religion and charity . . . .” Id. This constitutional status reflects the IOR’s
central role within the Holy See’s public law legal structure; indeed, authoritative IOR scholarship describes
the IOR as a Holy See “central entity.” See Italian Supreme Court of Cassation, Section V, 17 July 1987,
n.3932 (acknowledging that IOR is a “central entity” under the oversight of the Holy See, on Vatican City
Territory, and enjoying immunity from the jurisdiction of Italian criminal courts); see also, Statuto art. 3
(noting that the IOR must serve the Universal Church, subject to the oversight of the Holy See). The IOR’s
status has been recognized in bilateral treaties as well. See, e.g., L’Accordo Amministrativo per
l'Applicazione della Convenzione di Sicurezza Sociale tra La Santa Sede e La Repubblica Italiana (16 June
2000) (Agreement regarding the administration of social security between the Holy See and the Republic of
Case 3:99-cv-04941-MMC Document 273 Filed 03/20/2006 Page 10 of 20
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28 Decl. of Settimio Carmignani Caridi in Supp. of IOR’s Mtn. to Dismiss 4th Amended Cmplt.
Alperin v. IOR, Case No. C 99-04941 MMC (EDL) 11
Italy, recognizing the IOR as “one of the entities directly overseen by the Holy See”).
Location of the IOR
40. The IOR is located in a government building within the State of Vatican City.
Organizational Structure of the IOR
41. The IOR has several administrative levels, each authorized and described by law. In order
from highest governmental oversight to daily operational responsibility, the levels are: (1) Cardinals'
Commission; (2) Prelate; (3) Oversight Council; (4) Directorate; and (5) Accounting.
42. Cardinals’ Commission. The Cardinals’ Commission is composed of five Cardinal Members,
each of whom is a government official holding high office within the Roman Curia, and each of whom is
appointed by the sovereign. This Commission forms the direct institutional link between the sovereign
government and the IOR. The Commission is headed by the Secretary of State of the Holy See, the Pope’s
highest delegate for temporal affairs of this nature.
43. The Commission meets, by law, at least twice annually to review the IOR’s compliance with
its internal statutory norms. The Commission also appoints and removes members of the Oversight Council
(whose function is discussed below) and appoints and removes the IOR’s President and Vice-President. In
addition, the Commission: (a) deliberates as to the distribution of any available funds; (b) proposes to the
sovereign changes to the by-laws; (c) deliberates regarding the emoluments due to the Members of the
Oversight Council; (d) approves the appointment and the removal of the Director and of the Vice-Director
made by the Oversight Council; and (e) deliberates on any issue regarding the Members of the Oversight
Council and the Directorate. In maintaining plenary oversight authority over the IOR, the Cardinals’
Commission is legally mandated to pursue governmentally goals, but is not legally mandated to be involved
in IOR day-to-day activities or transactions. See Pastor Bonus art. 25, § 2 (describing the duty of the
Dicasterial Council of Cardinals for the Study of Organization and Economic Questions of the Holy See to
“consider the activities of the [IOR]” in its administration of “economic goods placed in its care.”).
Government officials are empowered to request information and records from the IOR. Id.
44. Prelate. Below the Cardinals’ Commission sits the Prelato, or “Prelate.” The Prelate
Case 3:99-cv-04941-MMC Document 273 Filed 03/20/2006 Page 11 of 20
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28 Decl. of Settimio Carmignani Caridi in Supp. of IOR’s Mtn. to Dismiss 4th Amended Cmplt.
Alperin v. IOR, Case No. C 99-04941 MMC (EDL) 12
oversees the activities of the IOR, acts as Secretary to the Cardinals’ Commission when it is in session,
attends the meetings of the Oversight Council, and provides an institutional link between the Cardinals’
Commission and the Oversight Council.
45. Oversight Council. The Oversight Council administers and manages the IOR, and supervises
its financial, economic and operative activities. The Oversight Council is convened by the President at least
once every three months, or when requested by two of its Members, and approves the IOR’s operational
budget, submitted by the the Directorate, each year. After approval, the Oversight Council transmits the
budget to the Commission, with a report on the IOR’s economic-financial situation and on how the activity
of the IOR complies with its bylaws. In addition, the Oversight Council: (a) formulates the general policy
lines and basic strategy for the activities of the IOR in harmony with its institutional ends; (b) defines the
criteria for the elaboration of yearly programs and objectives of the Directorate, and to approve its proposals;
(c) reviews the economic-financial activity of the IOR; (d) watches over the realization of programs and the
objectives that were set, with respect to investments and other activities; (e) defines the most appropriate
financial structure for the IOR and, in general, determines the best means to increase the IOR’s patrimony
and assets in the context of adherence to economic-financial rules and in compliance with the purposes of
the IOR; (f) proposes to the Commission changes in the by-laws, as long as they are unanimously approved
by Council staff; (g) arranges for issuance of the regulations, which are required to provide a detailed
description of the powers and competencies of the Council and the Directorate General; (h) confers with the
Directorate; and (i) approves the Directorate’s annual report.
46. Directorate. Below the Oversight Council is the Directorate, which consists of a Director
General and the Vice-Director. The members of the Directorate are appointed by the Oversight Council
subject to the approval of the Cardinals’ Commission. The Directorate is responsible for the operational
activities of the IOR.
47. This relationship between the Cardinals’ Commission, the Prelate, the Oversight Council, and
the Directorate is set forth in the Chirograph and the Statuto articulating the rules of IOR internal
governance. According to the Chirograph and the Statuto, the IOR is a public juridic person, which can
Case 3:99-cv-04941-MMC Document 273 Filed 03/20/2006 Page 12 of 20
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28 Decl. of Settimio Carmignani Caridi in Supp. of IOR’s Mtn. to Dismiss 4th Amended Cmplt.
Alperin v. IOR, Case No. C 99-04941 MMC (EDL) 13
contract and own property in its own name and which has its own legal representative, as specified by statute.
48. Auditors. Auditors operate under the Directorate and are officers of the IOR under the terms
of the Chirograph and Statuto, charged with monitoring the IOR’s activities.
Function of the IOR
49. The IOR performs functions which are unique and not performed by other organs or
institutions of the Holy See or the State of Vatican City. Compare, e.g., Pastor Bonus art. 25, § 2 (describing
IOR as “special institute for managing economic assets placed in its care with the purpose of supporting
works of religion and charity”) with Pastor Bonus arts. 172 -175 (describing the functions of the
Amministrazione del Patrimonio della Sede Apostolica as an administrator of properties owned by the Holy
See to fund the Roman Curia, overseen through a different administration, activities which are distinct from
the IOR) and with Pastor Bonus arts.176-179 (describing, inter alia, the Prefettura per gli Affari Economici
as supervising and governing the temporal goods of the administrations that are dependent on the Holy See
and reviewing reports on the patrimonial and economic status of the Holy See, all activities distinct from the
IOR.)
50. The IOR statute authorizes functions on the territory of the Holy See to facilitate the
operation of government. Statuto art. 2. While the day-to-day operations of the IOR are by law managed
by the IOR itself, as a public juridic person, the IOR is legally required to follow governmental policy
directives articulated through the Cardinals’ Commission. Statuto art. 8.
51. The IOR routes payments between certain Holy See agencies, a public function performed
for these tasks by no other entity on behalf of the Holy See. The IOR also finances Holy See religious works.
Pastor Bonus art. 25, § 2.
52. The IOR is legally empowered to operate the Holy See pension (“social security”) system for
its own employees, as well as all the other employees of the Holy See. See, L’Accordo Amministrativo per
l'Applicazione della Convenzione di Sicurezza Sociale tra La Santa Sede e La Repubblica Italiana (16 June
2000) (Administrative Accord for the Application of the Convention regarding Social Security between the
Holy See and the Republic of Italy, recognizing the IOR as “one of the entities directly overseen by the Holy
Case 3:99-cv-04941-MMC Document 273 Filed 03/20/2006 Page 13 of 20
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28 Decl. of Settimio Carmignani Caridi in Supp. of IOR’s Mtn. to Dismiss 4th Amended Cmplt.
Alperin v. IOR, Case No. C 99-04941 MMC (EDL) 14
See” and its role in the sovereign’s pension system).
53. The IOR performs a direct and public service function (funzione di servizio) for the Holy See.
The IOR’s founding documents do not authorize the retention of profit by the IOR.
54. By the terms of its founding documents and Pastor Bonus, the IOR carries out its activities
to promote sovereign goals. Pastor Bonus art. 25, § 2 (“economic goods placed in [IOR’s] care with the
purpose of supporting works of religion and charity.”); Statuto art. 2
55. The IOR is a limited depository institution. Depositors are essentially limited to Holy See
employees, members of the Holy See, religious orders, and persons who deposit money destined in whole
or in part for works of piety. Statuto art. 2
56. As a creature of the sovereign in the canonical system, where legal requirements are met, the
IOR could be wound up, or rededicated to other government purposes by legal act of the sovereign. See,
e.g. 1983 CODE c.120, § 1 (stating comptent authority’s power to suppress a public juridic person); and 1983
CODE c.121 (stating competent authority’s power to cause the merger of one juridic person with another).
“Ownership” of the IOR
57. Paragraph 31 of Fourth Amended Complaint states that the IOR is “in fact the personal
property of the Pope.” Plaintiffs “contend” that the IOR “is in fact the personal property of the Pope in his
position as the ecclesiastical head of the Roman Catholic Church and its Easter Rites along with other non
sovereign shareholders.” Fourth Amended Complaint ¶ 31. As a matter of applicable law, this statement is
incorrect. Like every separate juridic person in the canon law system, the IOR cannot be the property of
another. See, Statuto (IOR has canonical juridical personality). It may be that plaintiffs’ confusion arises
from application of certain generalized common law concepts such as “stakeholder,” “shareholder,”
“associate” or “partner.” These terms are simply legally inapplicable to this entity. To the extent that
plaintiffs are contending that the Pope has a property right in any deposits by either natural or juridic persons
in the IOR, the statement is similarly invalid as a matter of applicable law. Autonomous entities within the
Church possess the right to acquire and use property. 1983 CODE c.1255 (stating that the all juridic person,
whether public or private can acquire, retain, administer, or alienate temporal goods according to legal right).
Case 3:99-cv-04941-MMC Document 273 Filed 03/20/2006 Page 14 of 20
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28 Decl. of Settimio Carmignani Caridi in Supp. of IOR’s Mtn. to Dismiss 4th Amended Cmplt.
Alperin v. IOR, Case No. C 99-04941 MMC (EDL) 15
While the sovereign, as creator of a juridic person, may suppress it, or change its form, the sovereign – much
less the Pope in some “personal” capacity – cannot simply deprive the autonomous juridic person of its
canonical rights to the temporal goods it has acquired. 1983 CODE c.1256 ( “The right of ownership over
goods under the supreme authority of the Roman Pontiff belongs to that juridic person which has lawfully
acquired them.”) As commentaries on the canon law make clear, canon 1256 restated the fundamental
canonical principle nemo iure suo sine culpa (No one may be deprived of a right absent fault), and stands for
the principle that no person – even the Pope – can lawfully deprive another of temporal goods legitimately
acquired.
Juridic Status of the Order of Friars Minor
58. The Order of Friars Minor is a religious Order subdivided into separate juridic persons.
Amongst these juridic persons are the entities which serve particular territories (Provincali) and the General
Headquarters (Generale). Each member of the Order is associated with a particular House within a Province
(Locale). Each of the above is recognized as separate juridic persons in the canon law.
59. Each of these separate juridic persons may acquire, administer, alienate, and use temporal
goods independently, in accordance with universal law and the proper law of the Order. Cost. Gen. art. 244.
60. The General Chapter is governed by the constitutions and the general statutes, within the
canon law framework. Cost. Gen. art. 188. Officers of the General Chapter cannot contemporaneously serve
as officers of a Province. Cost. Gen. art. 179. The Provincial Minister, and other Province Officers, head
each juridically separate Province. Cost. Gen. art. 179. The General Chapter, each Province, and each House
appoints a legal representative for dealings with civil authorities. Cost. Gen. art. 246.
61. For those with legal seat in Italy, these separate juridic persons are also recognized in Italian
law ipso iure in view of their canonical status, and accordingly appear in public registers of juridic persons.
The OFM Headquarters, located in Rome, is not on Vatican City State territory, or on any extraterritorial
Case 3:99-cv-04941-MMC Document 273 Filed 03/20/2006 Page 15 of 20
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28 Decl. of Settimio Carmignani Caridi in Supp. of IOR’s Mtn. to Dismiss 4th Amended Cmplt.
Alperin v. IOR, Case No. C 99-04941 MMC (EDL) 16
holdings of the Holy See. Trattato Laterano arts. 13-16 and Attachment II. The General Chapter and each
Provincial Chapter are juridic persons separate from the Holy See. With respect to the OFM Headquarters
(House located in Rome), in Italian law, the separate juridic status during the relevant period is established
by decree of the Kingdom of Italy, dated June 13, 1935, and registered in the Court of Accounts on August
5, 1935, Register No. 365F n. 23-f. As a Royal Decree, this declaration has the force of positive public law
(not merely private declaration by the juridic person itself) and cannot be challenged. See also, Italian
Supreme Court of Cassation, Civil Section, Dec. 6, 2002, n.5458 (in action to hold Province liable for
conduct of a House, both of which were recognized as separate juridic persons, Italian Supreme Court of
Cassation held no civil responsibility of Province for actions of House.)
Juridic Status of the College of San Girolamo
62. The College of San Girolamo merits comment, in light of the legally imprecise manner in
which it is referred to in the Fourth Amended Complaint. The College of San Girolamo is a separate juridical
entity, Universitates Personarum, recognized in both canon law and Italian law and is, ipso iure, legally
autonomous from the Holy See, the IOR, and the OFM. The College has not been part of the Roman Curia,
Pastor Bonus, passim; is not located on the territory of the Vatican City State, or territory having Holy See
extraterritorial status under the Lateran Treaty, Trattato Laterano arts. 13-16 and Attachment II; and has
been considered a subject of Italy since at least 1924. Accord del 27 gennaio 1924, in 45 Gazzetta Ufficiale
889-903 (22 Feb.1924); art. 1, Law of 20 May 1985, n.222, in 129 Gazzetta Ufficiale (3 June1985); Il
Ministro del Interno, Decreto (Nov. 16, 1987).
\ \ \
\ \ \
\ \ \
Case 3:99-cv-04941-MMC Document 273 Filed 03/20/2006 Page 16 of 20
Case 3:99-cv-04941-MMC Document 273 Filed 03/20/2006 Page 17 of 20
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28 Decl. of Settimio Carmignani Caridi in Supp. of IOR’s Mtn. to Dismiss 4th Amended Cmplt.
Alperin v. IOR, Case No. C 99-04941 MMC (EDL) 18
ATTACHMENT A
Encyclopedia Entries
Rappresentanza in generale. Diritto canonico, in Enciclopedia del diritto, Milano, Giuffrè,1987, vol. XXXVIII, pp.485 ss.
Sodalizi, in Enciclopedia del diritto, Milano, Giuffrè, 1990, vol. XLII, pp. 1205 ss.
Ufficio del lavoro della Sede Apostolica (ULSA), in Enciclopedia giuridica, Roma, Istitutodella Enciclopedia Italiana (Treccani), 1994, pp. 1-8.
Collected Works and Professional Organization Publications
L'esperienza dei "Gruppi Giurinform" e la collaborazione degli ambienti universitari eprofessionali alla formazione degli archivi elettronici di giurisprudenza di merito, in 3/Congresso internazionale sul tema "L'informatica giuridica e le comunità nazionali edinternazionali", Roma, 9-14 maggio 1983, Corte Suprema di Cassazione - Centro elettronicodi documentazione, Sess. VI, n. 4, pp. 1-11.
Sviluppo, competenze e strutture del Pontificium Consilium pro laicis, in Studi in memoriadi Pietro Gismondi, Milano, Giuffrè, 1987, vol. I, pp. 255 ss.
Il "documento canonico". Peculiarità, difficoltà ed esperienze nella massimazione dipronunzie giurisprudenziali emesse da tribunali della Chiesa Cattolica, in 4/ Congressointernazionale sul tema "Informatica e regolamentazioni giuridiche", Roma, 16-21 maggio1988, Corte Suprema di Cassazione - Centro elettronico di documentazione, Sess. II, n. 13
I vecchi "Sodalizi in senso stretto" ed il nuovo CIC, in Proceedings of the Sixth InternationalCongress of Canon Law, München, 14-19 September 1987, Aymans-Geringer-Schmitz (eds.),St. Ottilien, 1989, pp.621 ss.
Libertà di abbigliamento e velo islamico, in AA.VV., Musulmani in Italia: La condizionegiuridica delle comunità islamiche a cura di Silvio Ferrari, Il Mulino (Prismi), Bologna, 2000,pp. 223–234
Significato e portata dell’art. 11 del Trattato lateranense, in Radio Vaticana e ordinamentoitaliano, a cura di Giuseppe Dalla Torre e Cesare Mirabelli, Giappichelli, Torino, 2005, pp.1-23.
Case 3:99-cv-04941-MMC Document 273 Filed 03/20/2006 Page 18 of 20
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28 Decl. of Settimio Carmignani Caridi in Supp. of IOR’s Mtn. to Dismiss 4th Amended Cmplt.
Alperin v. IOR, Case No. C 99-04941 MMC (EDL) 19
Contributions to the Annual of the Department of Public Law,University of Rome, II Tor Vergata
The reform of the Vatican judiciary system, in University of Rome II. Department of PublicLaw. Yearbook, Napoli, Editoriale Scientifica, 1988, pp. 217 ss.
The relevance of the dialogue between doctrine and jurisprudence in Canon Law, inUniversity of Rome II. Department of Public Law. Yearbook, Napoli, Editoriale Scientifica,1989, pp. 245 ss.
Articles Published in the Journal Il diritto di famiglia e delle persone
Primi orientamenti espressi dalla Corti d'appello in tema di esecutorietà di sentenzeecclesiastiche di nullità matrimoniale, 1982, pp. 891 e ss.
Ulteriori orientamenti giurisprudenziali in tema di esecutorietà di sentenze matrimonialicanoniche, 1982, pp.1481 e ss.
La Corte di Cassazione sull'adozione internazionale, 1982, pp. 1222 ss.
La Corte di Cassazione ed il problema del rito da seguirsi nel procedimenti d'esecutorietàdi sentenze matrimoniali canoniche, 1983, pp. 521 ss.
La Corte di cassazione e l'estensibilità del trattamento economico spettante alle lavoratricimadri adottanti o affidatarie in una fattispecie anteriore alla legge n. 903/1977, 1984, pp.497 ss.
Articles published in the Journal Archivio giuridico Filippo Serafini
Sviluppo, competenze e strutture del Pontificium Consilium pro Laicis, 1985, pp. 497 ss.
Il nuovo Codice di diritto canonico. Sintesi del V/ Congreso internazionale di dirittocanonico (Ottawa 19/26 agosto 1984), 1986, pp.177 ss.
Articles published in the journal Il diritto ecclesiastico
Il V/ Congresso internazionale di diritto canonico su"Il nuovo Codice di diritto canonico"(Ottawa 19-26 agosto 1984): sintesi dei lavori, 1985, I, pp. 267 ss.
Rassegna della giurisprudenza della Suprema Corte di Cassazione del 1983 in materia diassistenza e beneficenza "pubblica" e "privata", 1985, II, pp. 216 ss.
Curia romana e Stato della Città del vaticano. Criteri di individuazione dei rispettivi enti,
Case 3:99-cv-04941-MMC Document 273 Filed 03/20/2006 Page 19 of 20
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28 Decl. of Settimio Carmignani Caridi in Supp. of IOR’s Mtn. to Dismiss 4th Amended Cmplt.
Alperin v. IOR, Case No. C 99-04941 MMC (EDL) 20
1988, I, 139 ss.
L'error personae vel qualitatis personae nella giurisprudenza rotale (1983-1990), 1991, II,pp. 105 ss.
Articles published in the journal Quaderni di diritto e politica ecclesiastica
Giurisdizione italiana ed enti centrali della Chiesa: la Radio Vaticana ed il limite alleemissioni elettromagnetiche, in Quaderni di diritto e politica ecclesiastica, 2002, fasc. 3, pp.969-993
Thesis Submitted in Jurisprudence
Rapporti tra Stato e Chiesa nella Repubblica Popolare Polacca, Università degli studi diRoma [ora Università di Roma "La Sapienza"], a.a. 1978-1979.
Thesis Submitted for Doctoral Degrees in Canon and Ecclesiastical Law
Criteri di distinzione tra organi ed enti della Curia e dello S.C.V., Roma, aprile 1987 [dep.B.N.I. di Roma e Firenze]
Case 3:99-cv-04941-MMC Document 273 Filed 03/20/2006 Page 20 of 20
BRIMSTONE& CO.JONATHAN LEVY
1629 K STREET Nvtf SUITE 3OO
I:#XT|;;:;,Til?cHAM BERs@ an I usroN EAN DcoM PANY'coM
September 21,2012
European CommissionDireitorate General for Economic and Financial AffairsFinancial Stability & Monetary AffairsFinancial Institutions & Financial StabilityHead of Unit - Mr. Benjamin AngelB-1049 Brussels, Belgium
Via Email and Mail
In re: (Vatican) Autorita di Informazione Finanziaria (AIF) & Eu^/atican
Monetary Agreement and European Commission - Our Letter of May 28,
2012
Dear Mr. Angel:
We are patiently awaiting the Commission's response to oru
communication of -tf{ay
28,z}lzattached wherein we explain and provide
documentary evidenc. tt ut the Isfiruto per le Opery di Religione has been
misclassifi.b Uy the Commission as outside the jurisdiction of Directive
2OO5|60/EC because it belongs to the Holy See and not the Vatican City
State when in fact it is a juridic entity of the Vatican City state'
Sincerely,
Dr. Jonathan Levy '///t/trrtttrrrr\r\"'
Afforney and Solicitor for Holocaust Survivors and Organizations:
William DorictU Vojislav Poduda, Independent Council of Serbian Roma,
Republik Srpska Krajina in Exile et al'
Attachments via email only