• Abstract and Figures
• Public Full-text

[Communicated to the Council Official No.: C.190. M.79. 1934- VII. and the Members of the League.] Geneva, May 12th, 1934. LEAGUE OF NATIONS INCIDENTS WHICH HAVE OCCURRED ON THE FRONTIER BETWEEN HUNGARY AND YUGOSLAVIA COMMUNICATION FROM THE HUNGARIAN GOVERNMENT Note by the Secretary-General : The Secretary-General has the honour to communicate to the Council, for consideration, the following letter, dated May 8th, which he has received from the Hungarian Government. LETTER FROM THE HUNGARIAN MINISTER FOR FOREIGN AFFAIRS TO THE SECRETARY-GENERAL OF THE LEAGUE OF NATIONS. Budapest, May 8th, 1934. On behalf of the Royal Hungarian Government, I have the honour to communicate to you, and through you to the Council of the League of Nations, the following application : Subject of the Application. The Hungarian Government has for several years past been watching with the greatest anxiety the serious incidents that are continually occurring at the frontier between Hungary and Yugoslavia in consequence of the patently hostile attitude of the Yugoslav authorities and officials towards the Hungarian population. Those authorities and their officials are con­ stantly—and, it would seem, systematically—committing acts and taking measures which result in fatal incidents and other atrocities and deplorable occurrences. The outcome of all these proceedings is a situation unparalleled in Europe, and one of which the gravity cannot but be realised. Reasons. 1 he countless complaints made in this connection by the population of the frontier-zone against the Yugoslav authorities, and also the attitude of the Yugoslav Government in refusing to make any attempt at a direct settlement of the dispute in question, make it imperative to appeal to an international authority. It is in the hope that this step may have the effect of restoring that order and calm which are indispensable that the Hungarian Government thinks it expedient to lay all the questions at issue before the Council’s impartial judgment. The tragic end of the many persons who have succumbed to the cruel and unjustified use firearms by the Yugoslav frontier-guards has naturally aroused great feeling on each occasion among the people of that area, and has had considerable repercussions among the Public in Hungary. Antecedents. It must be established and placed upon record that the responsibility falls upon the ugoslav Government ; for, as will hereinafter be shown, the authors of the fatal incidents yi question, have always and without exception been officials of the Yugoslav frontier-guards. e Hungarian Government has duly brought each case in which the vital interests of its na 10nals were at stake to the notice of the Belgrade Government, with a view to obtaining Series of League of Nations Publications S' 4 N' J 025 (F.J. 970 (A.). 5/34. Imp. J. de G. VII. POLITICAL 1934. VII. 3. satisfaction, but has had but little success ; it has also many times appealed to that Govern­ ment to come to an amicable settlement of, at all events, a few fundamental questions. All the Royal Hungarian Government’s efforts, however, to secure the termination of the intolerable state of affairs established by the Yugoslav authorities at the Hungarian frontier failed in face of the categorical refusal of the Yugoslav Government. Proposals for Uniformity in the Regulations regarding the Use of Firearms by Frontier-Guards. Being of opinion that one of the chief causes of these unfortunate incidents is to be found in the unduly liberal interpretation placed upon the right to use firearms by the Yugoslav frontier-guards, and having regard to the considerable differences between the regulations governing the use of arms by the Yugoslav and by the Hungarian frontier-guards, the latter regulations being much more restrictive and influenced by humanitarian principles, the Hun­ garian Government has several times asked the Yugoslav Government to agree, in the interests of general tranquillity, to have the regulations in question made uniform by common consent. The Yugoslav Government’s Refusal. The direct negotiations opened on this matter by M. de Alth, Hungarian Minister at Belgrade, led, after some delays, to an oral reply from M. Pur itch, Secretary-General in the Yugoslav Ministry of Foreign Affairs, to the effect that his Government refused to make any change whatever in the regulations governing the use of firearms by the Yugoslav frontier- guards. This reply was followed by a written statement to the same effect, which already reveals the intention of evading responsibility. The General Interests of Peace. Reference to the League Covenant. Unquestionably, however, the present state of affairs cannot be allowed to continue ; for, even though it does not yet threaten to disturb the peace, the fact remains that it does seriously threaten ‘ ‘ to disturb the good understanding between nations upon which peace depends ”. It seems superfluous to point out to the Council of the League the dangers that are liable to arise, to-day more than ever, out of disputes between States, if they are not settled in time. In view of the present highly tense political atmosphere in Europe, there are numerous reasons for eliminating any factor that might inflame that atmosphere. Every relief of tension, even regionally, every rapprochement, even partial, would necessarily contribute to a general reconciliation, and hence would serve the great cause of European recovery, which is at the present time one of the principal tasks of the League. Thinking along these lines, the Hungarian Government has become convinced that it is its duty to appeal to the Council, not merely for the sake of those of its nationals who are affected, but also out of respect for the great international interests that demand the maintenance of good relations between the nations. In doing so, it believes itself justified in appealing to Article n , paragraph 2, of the League Covenant. Specification of Actual Cases. As for the actual cases on which this application is founded, it is essentially their great number, and the fact that they are being continually—indeed, systematically—repeated, that claim attention, apart from the cruelty that has frequently been observed in the actions of the Yugoslav officials. Some of these complaints are, of course, of minor importance ; but it must not be forgotten that even an injury of minor importance may, if continually repeated, lead to an intolerable situation. The same is true, a fortiori, of the fatal incidents, some of which are of unwonted gravity. A list (Annex 1) which does not claim to be exhaustive, but contains a number of incidents and atrocities that have recently occurred at the frontier between Hungary and Yugoslavia, is appended to this document, together with (Annex 2) the exchanges of notes dealing with the incidents in regard to which the Hungarian Government has made diplomatic representations. I. —- F r o n t ie r I n c id e n t s . The following cases may be mentioned as examples. First, the case of John Bali, aged 19, a Hungarian national, who, on May 27th, 1933, wished to go from one village to another situated near the frontier, but also in Hungarian territory, and who lost his way near G yékényes and thus entered Yugoslav territory. Realising his mistake, he at once turned back so as to re-enter Hungary. He was arrested by a Yugoslav frontier-guard and later taken into Yugo­ slavia. On the way, he was killed by the bullet of a Yugoslav guard. In the reply received from the Yugoslav Government on this matter, the latter endeavoured to explain this fatal use 01 firearms by stating that Bali, who was taken from Gotalovo to Botovo by a short cut crossing the frontier, noticing the boundary mark, tried to escape and ran towards the frontier, where­ upon, after firing into the air, one of the Yugoslav guards killed him. The Yugoslav Government made similar excuses to justify the cruel attitude of the Yugoslav frontier-guards in connection with the Budinci incident, when two H u n g a r i a n nationals, Charles Dravecz and Stephen Mâkos, were shot by these guards. These two men were killed at the same time, last Christmas eve. According to the Yugoslav reply to the diplomatie representations made in regard to this matter, the two men, after being arrested, attempted to escape by running in the direction of the frontier. Thereupon, the frontier- guards, as asserted in the Yugoslav reply, “ after summoning them to stop, opened fire and killed them both outright ”. Contrary to the assertions in the Yugoslav note, it was established by the investigations of the Hungarian authorities that the true facts of the case were altogether different from the Yugoslav version. The two men were first arrested and then taken to the Cepinci barracks, being compelled to walk barefoot through the snow—a fact which aroused keen indignation among the population. At Cepinci, a guard was ordered to take them to Hodos. It should be noted that this official selected a longer and worse road than the normal route, a path running through a dense forest near the frontier. In the forest, the two men were killed by the Yugoslav frontier-guards. Dravecz’ body bore traces of three bullet wounds and a wound caused by a cutting weapon, while Makos was shot in the stomach. It is hard to understand why it should have been necessary and how it wras possible to use a bayonet against a person who, it was asserted in the Yugoslav reply, was running away, and why two Hungarian nationals should be killed, even if they had been guilty of smuggling, since it was not when they were caught in the act that the Yugoslav guards fired on them, but several hours after their arrest.

Load more

  33

Copy Link