DISINFO: Those who deprived Bulgarians of the Aegean Sea were punished by the communist People’s Court
SUMMARY
The Bulgarian southern territories leading to the Aegean Sea were lost not because of the Neuilly-sur-Seine Treaty of 1919 but because of national traitors, who were later tried and punished by the Bulgarian People’s Court of 1944. These same national traitors were rehabilitated after the fall of communism.
RESPONSE
This is a disinformation narrative targetting Bulgarian national history (similar here and here) and loss of Bulgarian territories.
The Treaty of Neuilly-sur-Seine of 1919, which put an end to the First World War for Bulgaria, left the country with severe territorial losses, including the territory accessing the Aegean Sea. The clauses of the Treaty envisaged enormous reparations in comparison to Bulgaria’s economic abilities at the time which led to the reparations being reviewed and reduced over the following decade.
The article attempts to instil the impression that it was the People’s Court set up by the communist authorities in late 1944 – more than 20 years after the end of World War I - that restored justice as opposed to the ‘fascist’ monarchical regime, which turned a blind eye to high treason. The People’s Court was set up to dispose of the political and ideological opponents of communism, portrayed as punishing the officials responsible for Bulgaria’s involvement in the Second World War and issued death sentences to the regents of young King Simeon II, ministers, royal advisors, deputies during the World War II period, as well as numerous academics, journalists, artists and intellectuals.
In 1991, a law for the rehabilitation of repressed persons from the People’s Court was adopted. In 1996, the Supreme Court of the Republic of Bulgaria repealed some of the People's Court sentences due to "lack of evidence". With decision 4/1998 the Constitutional Court of Bulgaria declared the People's Court to be unconstitutional. In 2000, a law that condemned the Communist regime in Bulgaria as criminal was adopted. Hence, the People’s Court has been assessed to have represented an illegitimate and repressive institution. The rehabilitation of the victims of the Court, therefore, does not entail burnishing the reputation of ostensible ‘traitors’ – designated as such by virtue of their opposition to the communist authorities.