A-7811215 A-7811216 A-7811217
Decided by the Board July 6, 1953
Misrepresentation — As to citizenship — Displaced Persons Act of 1948 — Polish citizenship not lost by German naturalization under duress.
(1) A native of Poland who obtained German citizenship on February 6, 1940, under circumstances which constituted duress, but who continued to consider himself as a Polish citizen and never held himself out to be anything else, has not made willful misrepresentation in applying for an immigration visa under section 3 (b) of the Displaced Persons Act of 1948 when he failed to inform the proper authorities of his German naturalization. Such misrepresentation did not cut off avenues of inquiry.
(2) Polish citizenship is lost under Polish law when a person acquires citizenship of another State by his own volition. Therefore, a Polish citizen who acquired German citizenship under duress did not lose his Polish citizenship and continued to be an eligible displaced person under the Displaced Persons Act of 1948.
CHARGE:
Warrant: Act of 1924 — No immigration visa (all aliens).
BEFORE THE BOARD
Discussion: The appellants are an adult male, 59 years old, a widower, and his 2 daughters aged 21 and 14 years, all natives of Poland. They were admitted into the United States as displaced persons under the provisions of Public Law 774 on July 1, 1950. The examiner found that all respondents should be deported from the United States because the visas procured by them under section 3 (b) of the Displaced Persons Act of 1948 were obtained by misrepresentations and that they were not eligible displaced persons at the time they entered the United States.
The record shows that respondent, his wife and two children, all born in Poland, emigrated from the eastern portion of Poland because of the occupation of that territory by Russian forces. The respondent and his family entered the German occupied portion of Poland and remained there for 5 years. On February 6, 1940, at the North-East Central Immigration Office at Lodz, Poland, respondent applied for German citizenship on behalf of himself and his family. On that same day he signed a petition for German citizenship and received a certificate of German citizenship.
Respondent states that he applied for German citizenship because at that time he had good reason to believe that if he did not do so he would be returned to Russian occupied territory. He stated that his friends at home had been disappearing rapidly and that he knew that was the fate of all educated persons. He stated repeatedly that he continued to consider himself a Polish citizen, that he had never considered himself to be a German citizen, despite the issuance of the certificate. He never voted or belonged to any Nazi organization. He had none of the prerequisites of German citizenship. He continued to live in Poland until the continued advance of the Russian forces drove him and his family into Germany, along with large numbers of other Polish citizens. He remained in Germany from April 1945 until they left for the United States in June 1950.
Clearly, respondent always considered himself to be a Polish citizen and never held himself out to be anything else. He maintained throughout his hearing that it never occurred to him to state that he was a German citizen, because he never considered himself to be so. The examiner attempted to elicit from him an admission that he had committed the crime of perjury when he stated that he was Polish, rather than giving his nationality as German. Respondent made no admission of the crime. We do not agree with the examiner that respondent's testimony "must be considered as weak, unconvincing and entirely self-serving." The respondent's testimony is entirely consistent with that of numerous displaced persons and evidence from other sources which we accept as established historical fact as to the political conditions which existed in the Polish Corridor between 1940 and 1945 with regard to refugees who were neither Nazi nor Communist. They were given German citizenship en masse under circumstances which constituted duress.
As we said in the case of Matter of S----, A-7178998 (September 25, 1950):
It has become well established case law during the past 5 years that no one can be deprived of his own citizenship nor can new citizenship be forced upon him by duress. Doreau v. Marshall, 170 F. (2d), 721 (C.A. 3, 1948); Inouye v. Clark, 73 F.Supp. 1000 (S.D. Calif., 1947) (rev. on jurisdictional grounds, 175 F. (2d) 740); Fujizawa v. Acheson, 85 F.Supp. 674 (S.D. Calif., 1949); Abo v. Clark, 77 F.Supp. 806. It is highly questionable that appellants really became German citizens in 1941 because their testimony shows clearly that they had no choice about accepting German citizenship, and they did so only because of well-founded fear for their lives. It is also questionable that appellants ever lost their Lithuanian citizenship, but this question properly would be decided in the light of the law of Lithuania.
We believe that it is clear that under the Polish law respondents did not lose their Polish citizenship under the circumstances described in this record. Flournoy and Hudson, Nationality Laws, published by Carnegie Foundation for International Peace (1929), page 481, article 11, Law of January 20, 1920, provides as follows:
ART. 11. Polish citizenship shall be lost —
(1) By acquiring foreign citizenship
* * * * * *
On page 483 of the same volume is article 6 of the Order of June 7, 1920, issued by the Minister of the Interior relative to enforcement of the law of January 20, 1920. This order apparently is similar to our way of elucidating the law by regulation, and it provides as follows:
ART. 6. Polish citizenship may be lost under the following circumstances:
(1) When a person acquires citizenship of another state by his own volition; or
(2) When a person accepts a public office or enters the military service of a foreign state without the permission of the council of Ministers of the Polish State.
On page 489 of the same reference, is Order No. 540 of August 11, 1920, which provides:
With regard to loss of Polish citizenship as the result of failure to perform military service. Article 1. A Polish citizen may be deprived of his Polish citizenship if:
(1) He voluntarily leaves the service of the Polish army and resides outside of Poland, or in an area occupied by the enemy.
(2) If in order to avoid military service he leaves Poland and resides in a foreign country.
It is clear that none of these provisions of law or regulations apply in the instant case. Under these provisions respondent neither lost his Polish citizenship nor was he deprived thereof by the German forces occupying Poland. It is our opinion that appellants were not guilty of misrepresentation in declaring themselves to be Polish citizens on the several occasions when it was necessary for them to give information as to their citizenship. There is no indication that respondent made a willful misrepresentation of a material fact for the purpose of gaining admission into the United States as an eligible displaced person under section 10 of the Displaced Persons Act of 1948 (Public Law 774, 80th Cong.). Respondent was asked whether or not he knew that persons who were German citizens were not allowed to come into the United States under the Displaced Persons Act. He said repeatedly that he knew that, but he did not consider that it had any application to him, because he considered himself to be a Polish citizen.
Respondent has also stated that he knew, and it was common knowledge in the displaced persons camps, that the Americans and British "recalled" the acts of the Hitler government, including the granting of sham citizenship to refugees within German controlled territory. It has been said in this and other cases that have come before us that it was a common belief among the inhabitants of the displaced persons camps in Germany that if they had been granted German citizenship it was rescinded by this order.
There are no problems in this case, as there have been in many displaced persons cases, of misrepresentations as to name, birthplace, the dates on which the applicant for displaced persons status entered the necessary zones or of the other common misrepresentations made by refugees in displaced persons camps. There were no misrepresentations which would have cut off avenues of inquiry.
It is our finding that the representations made by respondent to the persons charged with the administration of the Displaced Persons Act were not willfully false. We find also that respondent and his daughters are not persons who acquired another nationality, and thus ceased to be eligible displaced persons under the law.
Respondent's daughters, aged 10 and 3 at the time the events described above began to take place, had no knowledge whatever of the representations made by their father, or of the granting of the sham German citizenship papers. They have been found by the many agents charged with the screening and choosing of applicants under the Displaced Persons Act to have been eligible displaced persons and to have fulfilled the other requirements of the law and the regulations. They have always considered themselves to have been Polish. They did not lose their Polish citizenship under the Polish law. They were not deprived of it by the action of the occupying German authorities. It is our belief that the charges stated in the warrant of arrest have no applicability whatever to them.
There is no showing that respondents intentionally made misrepresentations for the purpose of gaining admission into the United States as eligible displaced persons. We will order the termination of these proceedings.
Order: It is ordered that the proceedings be terminated.