Fight for homeland: Old owners storm land registry offices!

Fight for homeland: Old owners storm land registry offices!

On November 10, 1989, the Wall came down and with it the borders between East and West. This turning point brought euphoria and a wave of change for many East Germans. But with reunification, old questions emerged that remained unanswered. Former owners and their heirs made claims on properties, which became a real problem for residents, who had often lived in these houses for years. The fight for ownership broke out and led to a veritable storm on the land register offices, from Rügen to Suhl. There, users of real estate that were transferred during the GDR era tried to protect their rights and at the same time secure their existence. These demands fueled fears. The obstacle: the demands for the return of the real estate before compensation asthenicized human fates and caused a bitter conflict over property and rights. This is what Prisma reports about the difficulties that accompanied reunification.

A striking example is the Türke family from Falkensee. At Christmas 1989, a man from West Berlin visited them, pretending to be the owner of the property and house and asking the family to move out. After 25 years in the house, for which they paid a rent of 100 GDR marks, this led to a heated argument that even escalated at the garden fence. The federal government had pushed for the reclaiming of former properties after reunification and so many real estate claims became acute again. It was only in June 1990 that the two German states agreed on a procedure for settling outstanding property issues, which was enshrined in the property law by the People's Chamber of the GDR on September 29, 1990: “Restitution before compensation”. This regulation not only encouraged repatriation, but also caused a lot of uncertainty in the East German communities.

A bitter legal dispute

The processing of over two million applications in the East German real estate offices took years, which repeatedly caused criticism from the public. The Türke family also lost their argument and had to move out of their familiar home. Nevertheless, she received at least 65,000 German marks for conversion and renovation work, and a few years later the family built a new home on their own property. This shows how much the realities of life were influenced by the new ownership conditions and how many people had to struggle with the new ownership conditions.

The reunification not only led to personal conflicts. The discussion about land reform, which had cost many families their land in the Soviet occupied zone after 1945, was also brought up again. The Treuhandanstalt played a controversial role in the privatization of former GDR assets and did not incorporate the retransfers into the regulations. The background to these disputes is that many former landowners who had a function under the Nazi regime were denied compensation. The complexity of the regulations back then still causes debate today.

A future-oriented view

Despite the many challenges, many families have accepted the circumstances and have been able to promote positive developments in their communities. Social economist Dirk Löhr highlights that a new relationship to property rights could provide a certain solution to inequalities. Buybacks from family members are often successful and enable new jobs to be created in the region. The loss of property, painful as it was, has pushed many to become actively involved in their new community and overcome resentment.

The legacy of 1989 is not only one of loss and confrontation, but also of hope and the chance for a new beginning. Ultimately, it is up to everyone involved how they treat each other and how they draw the positive aspects from the story. The challenges of the past have not only shaped us, but have also created the opportunity to actively shape the future.