Non paper of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Slovak Republic
on the Presidential decrees of the Czechoslovak Republic


The Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Slovak Republic has noted with surprise the recent re-opening of the topic of post-war legislation of the former Czechoslovak Republic before the European Parliament by the Hungarian Prime Minister. In this respect, we deem it necessary to present certain background data.

Presidential decrees (referred to also as "Beneš decrees") are generally binding legal acts issued by the then exiled president of the Czechoslovak Republic, mostly at the final stages of World War II and also during the post-war period until the establishment of the Provisional National Assembly of the Czechoslovak Republic. There had been more than 140 of such legal acts that applied to various aspects of life of the society. All decrees were subsequently endorsed by the Provisional National Assembly and acquired the force of laws and/or constitutional statutes of the Czechoslovak Republic. Since the Presidential decrees are perceived as affirmation of legal continuity of the Czechoslovak Republic with its pre-war existence, it is unacceptable to take a negative view of the entire body of these legal acts issued by a legitimate State power. In the post-war legislation of the Czechoslovak Republic, they constituted the legal base for restoring, in the aftermath of World War II, the democratic Czechoslovak Republic, split as a result of Munich Pact of 29 September 1938 and Vienna Arbitration of 2 November 1938. The decrees thus form part of the legal system of the Slovak Republic as a successor to the Czech and Slovak Federal Republic.

None of the Presidential decrees provided specifically for expulsion of Germans from Czechoslovakia. The decision to that effect was taken at the Potsdam Conference by victorious powers. The idea of population transfers was not an uncommon solution used at the time to address the issue of minorities that could eventually become a source of tension in international relations. The Potsdam Declaration from 2 August 1945, which has the character of an international treaty, provides in its Article XIII for the transfer of ethnic Germans from Poland, Czechoslovakia and Hungary. Around 30 thousand ethnic Germans were thus expelled from Slovakia after World War II (compared to around 250 thousand ethnic Germans expelled from Hungary). Presidential decrees must be viewed against the background of their causal relationships with war events and the period of non-freedom (30 September 1938 – 4 May 1945), and their place in the post-war organisation of the world. Measures taken by Czechoslovak authorities were in conformity with the conclusions of Potsdam Conference and Agreement on Reparations from Germany, on the establishment of Inter-Allied Reparation Agency and Tripartite Commission for the Restitution of Monetary Gold based on the Conference (Paris, 21 December 1945). 

Potsdam Conference conclusions did not specifically regulate the status of the Hungarian minority in Czechoslovakia, as this issue was to be dealt with under a bilateral agreement between Czechoslovakia and Hungary. Exchange of persons of Hungarian and Slovak nationality (i.e. ethnicity) was thus carried out under a bilateral treaty – the Czechoslovak-Hungarian Agreement on Population Exchange (Budapest, 27 February 1946). Under the Agreement, persons of Hungarian nationality who had permanent residence within the territory of Czechoslovakia and who were stripped of their Czechoslovak citizenship under the relevant decree, were relocated to the territory of Hungary; their number was to be the same as was the number of persons of Slovak or Czech nationality who wanted to move voluntarily from Hungary to Czechoslovakia. The Czechoslovak Government was granted the right to go beyond the agreed number and to relocate to Hungary also those persons of Hungarian nationality with permanent residence in Czechoslovakia who committed one of the criminal offences mentioned in the Agreement. On the whole, population exchange concerned around 55,000 ethnic Hungarians who were transferred from Slovakia to Hungary and around 59,000 ethnic Slovaks who came from Hungary to Slovakia. The Agreement on Population Exchange and related international treaties, in particular Protocol between the Czechoslovak Republic and the Republic of Hungary on Final Settlement of Certain Unresolved Financial and Economic Issues (Štrbské pleso, 25 July 1949), settled with final effect property-related issues connected with population exchange between the Czechoslovak Republic and Hungary. Hungary lacks the grounds to open such property-related issues also due to the fact that it has not as yet returned Czechoslovakia artefacts belonging to the Czechoslovak cultural heritage, of which the Hungarian State or Hungarian public institutions gained possession after 1848 by virtue of Hungarian rule in the pre-1919 period. Hungary was held liable for the return of those artefacts under the Peace Treaty with Hungary (Paris, 10 February 1947).

The decrees that come most often under discussion are those related to the punishment for criminal and unlawful acts (so-called retribution decrees), confiscation of property or loss of citizenship. These legal acts created legal relationships that were the consequence of wartime events, and through which the legislative power strove to mitigate the damage inflicted as a result of extraordinary circumstances at the time of non-freedom. Legal regulations in question fulfilled those aims in the immediate post-war period, and they no longer give rise to legal relationships at present. The claim that the decrees were based on collective guilt is not correct. Retribution decrees (in particular Decree No. 16/1945 Coll.) were based exclusively on individual guilt. Courts handed down convictions for criminal offences committed at the time of the danger to the Republic by judgments rendered in criminal proceedings. Neither were the so-called confiscation decrees based on collective guilt. Thus, "confiscation decrees" (such as Decree No. 108/1945 Coll.) were applied in respect of property within the territory of Slovakia, which was owned not only by Germans or Hungarians, but also by traitors and enemies irrespective of their nationality. Under its exemption clause, the Presidential decree did not apply to those persons of German or Hungarian nationality who were able to demonstrate that they had remained faithful to the Czechoslovak Republic, have never committed offences against the Czech or Slovak nations, and have either taken an active part in the struggle for liberation, or had suffered consequences of Nazi terror. Although these provisions were based on the presumption of responsibility of persons of German and Hungarian nationality, they represented an adequate reaction to acts of aggression by Germany and Hungary of that time and pursued the aim of mitigating, both politically and economically, consequences of occupation. Property confiscation was carried out as of the date that marked the de facto end of German and Hungarian occupation. The confiscation was internationally confirmed by the Agreement on Reparations from Germany, on the establishment of Inter-Allied Reparation Agency and Tripartite Commission for the Restitution of Monetary Gold (Paris, 21 December 1945).  It should be emphasised that confiscation and nationalisation measures were implemented against the backdrop of broader social changes, and their further purpose was also to perform a land reform.

Another legal act of a similar character was Constitutional Decree No. 33/1945 Coll. on Citizenship that represented the legal base for stripping persons of German or Hungarian nationality of Czechoslovak citizenship. The decree did not apply to those Germans and Hungarians who at the time of the danger to the Republic declared themselves to be Czech or Slovak. Czechoslovak citizenship was preserved also by those persons who were able to demonstrate that they had remained faithful to the Czechoslovak Republic, have never committed offences against the Czech or Slovak nations, and have either taken an active part in the struggle for liberation, or had suffered consequences of Nazi terror. The decree further provided that those persons who have lost their Czechoslovak citizenship might request the return of their citizenship within six months. Under the legislation adopted at a later date, Czechoslovak citizenship was returned to persons of Hungarian or German nationality with residence in the Czechoslovak Republic who were not citizens of a foreign state.

A differentiated approach must be taken to evaluating the legal status of decrees "en bloc". Some decrees are no longer in force since they were either rescinded or superseded by more recent legal acts. Other decrees may be formally in force and in effect but, since they were applicable only to a certain limited period in the aftermath of World War II, they had been consumed and do not give rise to any new legal relationships, i.e. do not have a constitutive character. It can be noted that, in general, as long as Presidential decrees of the 1940 - 1945 period are still in effect, they have become obsolete (fell out of use). For this reason, none of the provisions of the decrees is applicable to persons of Hungarian or German nationality. Since the Presidential decrees do not give rise to new legal relationships at this time, it is not possible to examine their compliance with "acquis communautaire". Similar measures were taken at the time also by other European countries – current Member States of the EU. Assumption of commitments arising from the Treaty Establishing the EC does not have retroactive derogative effects and does not imply any obligation to revise the Presidential decrees or to interfere with the legal relationships they created.

The above issues have also their moral dimension. On 12 February 1991, the Slovak National Council issued a "Declaration on the Expulsion of Slovak Germans" whose spirit is expressed in its final sentence – "May the bridge of understanding between our nations span for ever the drying up river of war hatred." In the Declaration, the Slovak Republic expressed appreciation for historical contribution of Germans living in Slovakia to economic and cultural development of Slovakia, and expressed its regret at the suffering inflicted as a result of expulsion also on innocent ethnic Germans. By contrast, Hungary has not yet deemed it appropriate to apologise for the fact that it occupied, in violation of the principles of international law, part of Czechoslovak and/or Slovak territory during World War II under the Vienna Arbitration of 1938.


Bratislava, 10 April 2002

 

 

Consultative Group of External Advisors to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Slovak Republic on the Issue of Decrees of the President of the Czechoslovak Republic

I

The topic of decrees issued by the President of the Czechoslovak Republic and of regulations enacted by the Slovak National Council during World War II and immediately after the war has recently become the subject of extensive domestic and international discussions.

To help address the relevant issues in a comprehensive manner, to establish a reliable information source and to deal with the possibility that the topic of post-war legislation could be raised in future, among other things, in connection with Slovakia’s accession to the European Union, JUDr. Jaroslav Chlebo, state secretary, Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Slovak Republic, initiated the setting up of a consultative group of external experts in history, law and sociology to advise the Ministry of Foreign Affairs on the implications of the Czechoslovak President’s decrees (for a list of experts’ names, see Section III).

In addition to the consultative group of external advisors, an inter-agency working group was established to deal with the implications of the Czechoslovak President’s decrees comprising specialists from the Ministry of the Interior, Ministry of Agriculture, Ministry of Finance, the Office of the Government of the Slovak Republic and the Academy of Sciences (for a list of names, see Section IV).

To date the Ministry of Foreign Affairs has hosted three meetings of external advisors held on 19 April 2002, 4 June 2002 and 27 June 2002 respectively at which ideas were introduced about the goals and logistical aspects of the group’s work.

The main outcome of the group’s activities is expected to take the form of a comprehensive compendium of documents analysing various aspects of the topic and, potentially, lead to a conference attended by authoritative international experts.

The group of external advisors will aim to make a comprehensive assessment of the legal aspects of the Czechoslovak President’s decrees, of the international law context at the time of their issuance, the practical aspects of their enforcement and of their implications for the Slovak Republic’s current interests. The group will also examine the relevant documents of the period such as regulations issued by the Slovak National Council in 1945, the Czechoslovak-Hungarian Agreement on Population Exchange (1946), the Peace Treaty with Hungary (1947) and the Protocol signed by the Czechoslovak Republic and the Republic of Hungary on the final settlement of some outstanding financial and economic issues (know as the Štrba Protocol of 1949) as well as rulings by Czechoslovakia’s Supreme Administrative Court in 1945-1951 and documents of the Population Authority and of the National Reconstruction Fund. The problem of the Sudeten Germans, the occupation of Southern Slovakia and the Nuremberg process constituted an important historic backdrop and had a direct impact on the issuance of the relevant decrees.

In the process, group members explore working materials and other topical documents relevant to what has become known as the Beneš Decrees, including but not limited to

The Non-paper of the Slovak Republic concerning the Czechoslovak President’s decrees

The Slovak Republic’s official position presented in a letter of the Permanent Mission of the Slovak Republic in Brussels to Mr E. Brok, chairman of the foreign affairs, security and defence policy committee of the European Parliament

The Czech Republic’s official position presented in a letter of the ambassador, Permanent Mission of the Czech Republic in the EU, to Mr E. Brok, chairman of the foreign affairs, security and defence policy committee of the European Parliament

Legal analysis by the German Bundestag of legal issues associated with the Czechoslovak President’s decrees and the Czech Republic’s accession to the EU.

With regard to the latter of the above documents and in respect of other relevant papers, the group of external advisors to the Foreign Ministry noted that none of them made inferences that would cast any doubt on Slovakia’s position in the matter. The positions formulated in those documents did not question the legitimacy of the Beneš Decrees but treated as open the question of conformity of restitution regulations enacted after 1989 to Slovakia’s commitments under international law, especially with regard to citizenship and permanent residence requirements.

The second and third meetings of the group reviewed the Czechoslovak President’s decrees in the context of the most recent developments in the issue. In this regard, it should be noted that in general no attempts had been made to question the legitimacy of the decrees; by the same token, no restitution claims had been admitted. Among other things, it was pointed out in the discussion that most ethnic Hungarians (approximately 44 thousand persons) resettled to Bohemia under Decree 88/1945 Coll. on general work duty received compensation on returning home as part of the JUH [SOUTH] campaign and that historic data made it possible to itemise restored property. It was also noted that a substantial part of restitution claims had been addressed by the Extra-judicial Rehabilitation Act, in particular claims concerning agricultural assets confiscated and transferred to other owners under SNC Regulation 104/1945 Coll.

It is important to point out that, despite all efforts, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs has not been able to identify and engage in the consultative group of external advisors a legal expert that would advocate views on Czechoslovakia’s post-war legislation other than the official position. After all, it was with this purpose in mind that the goal of the consultative group was formulated, namely to prepare a compendium of analyses and documents that would make impossible any future attempts at misusing this issue in general and in connection with Slovakia’s accession to the EU.

The third session held on 27 June 2002 discussed specific requirements formulated by group co-ordinators appointed at the meeting and pertaining to the specific topics to be dealt with by the group. The requirements largely concerned background documents to be made available by the Ministry of the Interior in the matter of confiscation procedures pursued by Czechoslovakia’s National Committees during the period in question, the rulings by Czechoslovakia’s Supreme Administrative Court in 1945-1951 and archive documents of the Population Authority and National Reconstruction Fund. Position papers are to be drawn up by October 2002.

II

The group of external advisors to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Slovak Republic on issues raised by the Czechoslovak President’s decrees will be examining the following problem areas:

The position of the Czechoslovak Republic and the international situation in the 1930s until March 1939 (co-ordinator: Dr. Deák)

Legality and legitimacy of the decrees and SNC regulations (co-ordinators: Associate Professor Beňa, Dr Zavacká)

Dealing with outstanding issues between the Czechoslovak Republic and Hungary in the world order after World War II (co-ordinator: Dr. Čierna - Lantayová)

Enforcement of the decrees issued by the President of the Czechoslovak Republic and of SNC regulations (co-ordinators: Associate Professor Šutaj, Associate Professor Beňa; 1950s – Dr Žatkuliak and Dr Štefanský)

Implications of the post-war legislation under international law (co-ordinators: Dr Zavacká, Dr Čierna - Lantayová)

The restitution dimension of issues pertaining to decrees issued by the President of the Czechoslovak Republic and to SNC regulations (Professor Štefanovič, Dr Puškáč, representatives of the inter-agency working group)

Decrees issued by the President of the Czechoslovak Republic, SNC regulations and Slovakia’s integration into the EU (co-ordinating authority: Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Slovak Republic.

III

Members of the Consultative Group of External Advisors to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Slovak Republic on the issue of decrees of the President of the Czechoslovak Republic:

Professor JUDr. Milan Štefanovič, DrSc., Law School, Trnava University
Professor JUDr. Ján Lazar, DrSc., Law School, Trnava University
Associate professor PaeDr. Štefan Šutaj, DrSc., Institute for Social Sciences, Slovakia Academy of Sciences, Košice
Associate professor JUDr. Jozef Beňa, CSc., Law School, Matej Bela University, Banská Bystrica
JUDr. Jaroslav Puškáč
, Director General, Slovakia Land Fund
Ing. Ján Varjú, Manager, Office of the Ministry of Agriculture of the Slovak Republic
JUDr. Katarína Zavacká, CSc., Institute for State and Law, Slovak Academy of Sciences, Bratislava
PhDr. Jozef Žatkuliak, CSc., Institute for History, Slovak Academy of Sciences, Bratislava
Dr Michal Štefanský, CSc., Institute for Military History, Bratislava
PhDr. Ladislav Deák, DrSc., Institute for History, Slovak Academy of Sciences, Bratislava

IV

Members of the Inter-agency Working Group of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Slovak Republic on the issue of decrees of the President of the Czechoslovak Republic

PhDr. Dagmar Čierna-Lantayová, CSc., Institute for History, Slovak Academy of Sciences, Bratislava
JUDr. Dušan Šveda, Director, Legislation and Administration Department, SEVS, Ministry of the Interior, Bratislava
JUDr. Ján Svák, Director General, Editing and Publishing Section, Ministry of Justice, Bratislava
JUDr. Jozef Gaisbacher, Director General, Legislation and Approximation of Law Section, Ministry of Agriculture, Bratislava
JUDr. Eva Benešová, Director, Property and Restitution Department, Ministry of Finance, Bratislava
JUDr. Ronald Strehár, Director, Approximation of Law Department, Office of the Government of the SR, Bratislava

V

For queries concerning issues raised in connection with decrees issued by the President of the Czechoslovak Republic and regulations of the Slovak National Council during World War II or in the post-war period and to submit own views and comments in the matter, please contact the Press Department, Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the SR, telephone 02/59783621, fax. 02/59783639, 02/59783638, mail: infopublic@foreign.gov.sk

VI

Attachment:

Recommended reading on issues raised by decrees of the President of the Czechoslovak Republic and regulations of the SNC as suggested by members of the Consultative Group of External Advisors to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the SR:

BEŇA, Jozef : Kolektívna vina [Collective Guilt]. Nové slovo bez rešpektu, No 43, 25 October 1993.

BEŇA, Jozef : Dekréty svedomia [Decrees of Conscience]. Literárny týždenník, 10.11.1995.

BEŇA, Jozef : K otázke kolektívnej viny [On the Issue of Collective Guilt]. Notitiae novae facultatis iuridicae, PF UMB, Banská Bystrica, IV 2000.

ČIERNA-LANTAYOVÁ, Dagmar: Slovensko-maďarské vzťahy v medzinárodných súvislostiach, politike slovenského štátu a v zahraničnopolitických koncepciách povojnovej ČSR (1938-1949) [Slovak-Hungarian Relations in the International Context, in the Policies of the Slovak State and in Foreign Policy Concepts of the Post-war Czechsolovak Republic].

ČIERNA-LANTAYOVÁ, Dagmar: Poznámky k dekrétom prezidenta E. Beneša z aspektu postavenia maďarskej menšiny na Slovensku v rokoch 1945-1949 [Comments on decrees by President Edvard Beneš from the standpoint of the status of the ethnic Hungarian minority in Slovakia in 1945-1949].

ČIERNA-LANTAYOVÁ, Dagmar: Reparácie a reštitúcie v zmluvách z rokov 1945-1949 [Reparations and restitutions in the 1945-1949 Treaties].

ČIERNA-LANTAYOVÁ, Dagmar: Podoby Československo-maďarského vzťahu 1938-1949 (Východiská, problémy a medzinárodné súvislosti) [Shades of Czechoslovak-Hungarian Relations in 1938-1949 (Background, Issues and the International Context)]. Veda, Bratislava, 1992.

DEÁK, Ladislav: Slovensko v politike Maďarska v rokoch 1938-1939 [Slovakia in Hungary’s Policies in 1938-1939]. Veda, Bratislava 1990.

DOLEŽAL, Bohumil: Poznámky k “prezidentským dekretúm” [Comments on ”Presidential Decrees”]. Medzinárodní vztahy, No 63/1996.

KIMMINICH, Otto: Postupim a otázka vyhnání - následky pro středoevropskou historii a kulturu [Posdam and the Expulsion Issue – Implications for Central european Histrory and Culture]. Medzinárodní vztahy, No 63/1996.

KOLEKTÍV AUTOROV: Rozumět dejinám. Vývoj česko - nemeckých vztahú na našem území v letech 1848 - 1945. [Group of Authors: Understanding History. Evolution of German-Czech Relations in Our Land in 1848-1945]. Gallery, s. r. o., Praha, 2002.

KUKLÍK, Jan: Mýty a realita takzvaných “Benešových dekretú”. Dekrety prezidenta republiky 1940-1945 [Myths and Realities of the ”Beneš Decrees”. Decrees of the President of the Republic in 1940-1945] Linde Praha, a. s., Praha 2002.

LIPTÁK, Ľubomír: Slovensko v 20. storočí. (Druhé vydanie) [Slovakia in the 20th Century. (Second edition)]. Kalligram, Bratislava, 2000.

MANDLER, Emanuel: Budeme obhajovat Benešovy dekrety? [Are We Going to Defend the Beneš Decrees?] Medzinárodní vztahy, No 63/1996.

MRÁZEK, Josef: Tzv. sudetonemecká otázka a poválečné dekrety prezidenta republiky [The So-called Sudeten Germans Issue and Post-war Decrees of the President of the Republic]. Právní rádce, No 5/2002.

PAVLÍČEK, Václav - DIJMEK, Jindřich - WEIGL, Jiří: Benešove dekrety, Zborník textov č. 18/2002 [The Beneš Decrees A collection of Texts No 18/2002]. CEP, Praha, 2002.

ŽATKULIAK, Jozef: K dekrétom prezidenta E. Beneša a k nariadeniam Slovenskej národnej rady vo vzťahu k súčasnosti. Kancelária NR SR. Parlamentný inštitút. Bratislava, máj 2000 [On Decrees of President E. Beneš and Regulations of the Slovak National Council Inasmuch as They Relate to the Present. Office of the NC SR. Parliamentary Institute. Bratislava, May 2002].

“Benešove dekréty a Slovensko”: informačný materiál ministra spravodlivosti SR (máj 2002) [“Beneš Decrees and Slovakia”: Information Paper by the Ministry of Justice of the Slovak Republic (May 2002)], http://www.ial.sk/appl/material.nsf/0/E25C73670831748DC1256BCD00427C7E/$FILE/Zdroj.html

ŠTEFANSKÝ, M.: Dekréty prezidenta republiky (1940-1945), historický pohľad [Decrees of the President of the Republic (1940-1945) – A Historic View]. Bratislava 2002.

ŠUTAJ, Š. Reslovakizácia. Zmena národnosti časti obyvateľstva Slovenska po II. svetovej vojne [Reslovakisation. Changes in the Ethnic Structure of a Part o fSlovakia’s Population after World War II], Košice, 1991

ŠUTAJ, Š. Akcia Juh - odsun Maďarov zo Slovenska do Čiech. Sešity Ústavu pro soudobé dějiny, Svazek 8, Praha 1993, 85 strán, predhovor K. Kaplan, ang. resumé, 115 s. [Campaign South – Expulsion of Ethnic Hugarians from Slovakia to Behemia]. Sešity Ústavu pro soudobé dějiny, 85 p., vol. 8, Prague, 1993; preface by K. Kaplan, 115 p.

ŠUTAJ, Š. Maďarská menšina na Slovensku v rokoch 1945-1948 [Hungarian Ethnic Minority in Slovakia in 1945-1948]. Veda, Bratislava, 1993, 286 p.

ŠUTAJ, Š (1999): Nútená výmena, resp. vyhnanie Maďarov zo Slovenska. Plány a skutočnosť. [Forced Exchange or Expulsion of Ethnic Hungarian from Slovakia. Plans and Reality]. I.: Brandes, D., Ivančíková, E.,Pešek, J.(Eds): Vyhnanie a vysídlenie z Československa 1938-1947 v porovnaní s Poľskom, Maďarskom a Juhosláviou [Expulsion and Resettlement from Czechoslovakia in 1938-1947 compared to Poland, Hungary and Yugoslovakia]. Veda. Bratislava, pp. 203-217.

ŠUTAJ, Š.: Maďarská otázka na Slovensku v rokoch 1945-1970 [Hungarian Question in Slovakia in 1945-1970]. In. ŠUTAJ, Š (ed): Vývoj a postavenie maďarskej národnostnej menšiny na Slovensku po roku 1945 [Evolution and Status of the Ethnic Hungarian Minority in Slovakia after 1945]. Košice, 1990, pp. 5-36.

ŠUTAJ, Š, (1999): Nútená výmena, resp. vyhnanie Maďarov zo Slovenska. Plány a skutočnosť [Forced Exchange or Expulsion of Ethnic Hungarians from Slovakia]. In.: Brandes, D., Ivančíková, E., Pešek, J. (Eds): Vyhnanie a vysídlenie z Československa 1938 – 1947 v porovnaní s Poľskom, Maďarskom a Juhosláviou Expulsion and Resettlement from Czechoslovakia in 1938-1947 compared to Poland, Hungary and Yugoslovakia]. Veda. Bratislava, pp. 203-217.

ŠUTAJ, Š.: Poznámky ku Kapitolám z povojnových dejín Maďarov vysídlených do Čiech [Notes on Chapters on the Post-war History of Hungarians resettled in Bohemia]. Střední Europa, vol. 8, No 26, 1992, pp. 76-85.

ZEĽOVÁ, A.-BAČOVÁ, V.-ŠUTAJ, Š.-VÝROST, J.: Interpretácia slovensko-maďarských vzťahov v súvislosti s vybranými etnickými a sociálnopsychologickými charakteristikami. (výsledky na súbore učiteľov) [An Interpretation of Slovak-Hungarian Relations Concerning Selected Ethnic and Socio-psychological Characteristics (findings in a cohort of teachers)]. Košice, 1992, 135 p.

ZEĽOVÁ, A.-BAČOVÁ, V.-HADUŠOVSKÁ, S.-HOMINIŠINOVÁ, M.-OLEJNÍK, M.-PAUKOVIČ, V.-ŠUTAJ, Š.-VÝROST, J.: Minoritné etnické spoločenstvá na Slovensku v procesoch spoločenských premien [Minority Ethnic Communities in Slovakia in Processes of Social Changes]. Veda, Bratislava, 1994, 157 p.

ZAVACKÁ, Katarína: Hra s ohňom. O Benešových dekrétoch trochu inak [Playing with Fire. On the Beneš Decrees from a Somewhat Different Angle]. Slobodný piatok, 4, 1993, No 29, p. 6. 93.07.23.

ZAVACKÁ, Katarína: Eduard Beneš - československý a európsky politik, alebo súčasný zápas o Beneša [Eduard Beneš – a Czechoslovak and European Politican or a Present-day struggle for Beneš]. In: Idea Československa a střední Evropa. Sborník příspěvků z konference konané k 75. výročí 28. října 1918 v Brně a v Martině 28.-30.října 1993 [The Idea of Czechoslovakia and Central Europe. A Book of Proceedings of a Conference on the 75th Anniversary of 28 October 1918 held in Brno and Martin on 28-30 October 1993]. Brno, Supplement 1994, pp. 83-84