Information Note on the Court’s case-law No. 7
June 1999
Domalewski v. Poland (dec.) - 34610/97
Decision 15.6.1999 [Section IV]
Article 1 of Protocol No. 1
Article 1 para. 1 of Protocol No. 1
Peaceful enjoyment of possessions
Former officer of Communist security services deprived of "veteran" status: inadmissible
From 1947 until 1956 the applicant was an officer of the Ministry of Public Security and the Committee for Public Security. Between 1974 and 1980 several decisions were issued granting the applicant "veteran status" on the basis of the fact that from 1944 to 1947 he had served in the allied armies and in the "Restored Polish Army" and had taken part in "the armed struggle to consolidate the people's power". Following his retirement, he received a retirement pension and a so-called "veteran benefit". However, in 1994 the Director of the Office for Veterans and Persecuted Persons issued a decision divesting the applicant of his veteran status, pursuant to a 1991 law, on the ground that he had served in organs of the public security service. The applicant's appeal was rejected by the Supreme Administrative Court.
Inadmissible under Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 in conjunction with Article 14: While payment of contributions into a social insurance scheme gives rise to a right to derive benefits from the scheme, Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 cannot be interpreted as giving an individual a right to a pension of a particular amount. In this case, the applicant retained all the rights attaching to his ordinary pension, stemming from the contributions he had paid into his pension scheme, so that the loss of his "veteran status" did not result in the essence of his pension rights being impaired. Furthermore, divesting him of that status did not amount to discrimination contrary to Article 14 of the Convention. The measures taken by the Polish legislature in respect of persons who had previously served in the Communist public security service were primarily aimed at an objective verification of whether such persons satisfied the present statutory conditions for being awarded a special honourable status. The means employed therefore had an objective and reasonable justification in Poland's historical experience and they pursued a legitimate aim, namely to regulate the operation of the existing system of exceptional privileges: manifestly ill-founded.
© Council of Europe/European Court of Human Rights
This summary by the Registry does not bind the Court.
Click here for the Case-Law Information Notes
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy