BRAUNAU, VIENNA, June 30 (Xinhua) -- The expropriation of the birthplace of Adolf Hitler in Braunau is valid and not unconstitutional, the Austrian Constitutional Court ruled on Friday.
The Austrian Constitutional Court rejected a lawsuit appeal from its former proprietor, reaffirming its consistent stance of "the uncompromising rejection against Nazi a basic and fundamental principle of the Republic of Austria, since it was re-established in 1945".
The Republic of Austria bears a "special responsibility" in the fighting against the new Nazi Symptom, Gerhart Holzinger, president of the Austrian Supreme Court, announced in a statement.
Despite having been nominally returned to the former owners in 1952, the house, located in Braunau in upper Austria, had been rented by the Austrian government on various purposes, as the house had been latest used as a day-time Health Care and Life-Assistance center until 2011, since then it was left empty.
On account of the necessity to forestall the property from any involvement into new Nazi's resurgence, the Interior Ministry announced that the house would be renovated and returned to social use for the livings help, after an special law with regard to the expropriation of the house was passed and took effect, on Jan. 14, 2017.
The lawyer of the former proprietor of the house, Gerhard Lebitsch, brought in a lawsuit, contradicting the expropriation as problematic and abnormal not in line with fair legal procedure.
Austrian Supreme Court rejected the alleged infringement of the right to a fair trial, claiming it neither "recognizes any abuse of the legality, nor in violation of the right to property", on contrary, "it is necessary in the public interest", according to Holzinger.
He emphasized Austria must observe its obligations under international law and the Treaty of Vienna, bear "a special responsibility" in vigilance against the resurgence of the Nazi's ideology in whatever forms or under whatever disguises.
Hitler's birthplace had a unique feature that it would be suitable to be visited as a kind of "pilgrimage" or a place of identification for the care of the new Nazi thoughts, Holzinger said, adding the State is obliged to ensure that misuse of whatever forms of "specific symbol" must be rooted out, in such a case, "the need for expropriation" stands valid.
The amount of the compensation will have to be determined after negotiations by the Interior Ministry with the legal representatives of the former proprietor, explained Holzinger.
"In terms of preservation of historical relics, it is not applicable in this constitutional jurisdiction, while this is a very unusual case because it concerns about combating against Nazi repression," he said, stressing the Supreme Court had be always consistent in its line of judgments on Nazi-related cases.
The Austrian government had previously tried to purchase the property many times but ended up with nothing in the past.
