Opočno will remain with the state, the Constitutional Court dismissed the complaint of Colloredo-Mansfeld

Brno - The Opočno Castle in Rychnov will remain with the state. The Constitutional Court (CC) today rejected the complaint of Kristina Colloredo-Mansfeldová, the daughter of the last noble owner of the castle. The dispute over the return lasted since the first half of the 1990s. In her last complaint, Colloredo-Mansfeldová pointed to an allegedly racial motive behind the persecution of the family, but the CC stated that this could not be proven with sufficient certainty. Colloredo-Mansfeldová did not attend today's announcement of the ruling, nor did her legal representative.

Colloredo-Mansfeldová's legal representative, Jakub Fröhlich, told ČTK that after reviewing the detailed reasoning of today's ruling, he would consider the next steps in the matter. "Options such as a complaint to the European Court of Human Rights or the reopening of proceedings if evidence emerges that could not be used in the original proceedings are among the possibilities. For now, it is premature to talk about further steps," Fröhlich told ČTK.

The castle curator, Tomáš Kořínek, welcomed today's ruling. "We will wait for the steps of the other party," he stated. According to him, disputes complicate the repairs of Opočno, and so far, only emergency situations have been manageable.

The Opočno Castle was seized by the Nazis, and after the war, the state took over the castle. After the fall of communism, the courts dealt with the case repeatedly, with several twists. Colloredo-Mansfeldová even managed the castle for a certain period. However, after the intervention of the CC, the state resumed custody of the property in April 2007.

Later, thanks to another ruling by the CC, Colloredo-Mansfeldová achieved the reopening of the proceedings. However, the same decision as before was made, meaning the castle is still managed by the National Heritage Institute.

According to the final verdict, the reasons for the confiscation during the Protectorate were more political and national. Colloredo-Mansfeldová disagreed with this, arguing in her constitutional complaint that the property of the mother of the last owner, Josef Colloredo-Mansfeld, was confiscated in France as a Jewish person. Therefore, it is allegedly a question of whether the seizure of Opočno was not a racial persecution or whether Jewish ancestors were one of several reasons for the action against the Colloredo-Mansfeld family.

However, according to the constitutional judges, it is not enough for "the demonstration of other motives for persecution, to which racial reasons could eventually be added." The CC emphasized that there can be no doubt about the criminality of the confiscatory practices of the Nazi authorities; however, restitution legislation could not remedy all injustices.

"Seventy years after the end of the war, this reparation is extremely difficult, if not impossible. For this reason, the restitution law limited the review of the transitions of property preceding the decisive period to the most extreme cases due to racial persecution," stated in the ruling by the reporter judge Radovan Suchánek. The three-member panel was not unanimous, with Judge Jiří Zemánek disagreeing with the ruling.

"I noticed that one of the judges in the panel expressed a different opinion from the majority. He listened to our arguments. However, the reality is that the majority opinion decides," Fröhlich told ČTK.

In addition to the castle itself, the descendants of the original owners are also suing the state for the furnishings. They were supported by the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg, which prompted the CC to reopen two proceedings regarding older, originally rejected complaints. However, no new decisions have been made yet.