¹ For more on the history of Albania, see Pollo, Stefanaq & Puto, Arben, The History of Albania: From its Origins to the Present Day (Wiseman, Carol & Hole, Ginnie trans., 1981)Google Scholar; U.S. Dep’t of State, Background Note: Albania (Aug. 2011), at http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ei/bgn/3235.htm [hereinafter Background Note].

² See Background Note, supra note 1.

³ See Bettauer, Ronald J., Book Review, 94 AJIL 810, 811 n.6 (2000)Google Scholar (reviewing Burns H. Weston, Richard B. Lillich & David J. Bederman, International Claims: Their Settlement by Lump Sum Agreements, 1975-1995 (1999)).

⁴ Claims Settlement Agreement, U.S.-Alb., pmbl., Mar. 10, 1995, TIAS No. 12, 611 (entered into force Apr. 18, 1995) [hereinafter CSA], reprinted in 1995 Y.B. Foreign Claims Settlement Commission [FCSC] 17-20, available at http://www.justice.gov/fcsc/readingroom/report.pdf.

⁵ CSA, supra note 4, Art. 1(a). The CSA also covered the reciprocal assertion of “claims of nationals of Albania (including natural and juridical persons) against the United States prior to the date of this agreement.” Id., Art. 1(b).

⁶ Id., Agreed Minute, para. 1. In the text (versus the citations), the separate numbered paragraphs of the Agreed Minute will be referred to as Agreed Minutes (1), (2), and (3).

⁷ The Agreed Minute to the CSA specifically excluded claims of the Conservative Baptist Mission Society, which had numerous properties in the country. See id., Agreed Minute, para. 2. The society desired to pursue its remedies in Albania under Albanian law, and the CSA specifically required that Albania grant to the society “the same rights as it affords Albanian nationals under the laws of Albania to pursue and receive compensation, restitution, or any other local remedy available under its domestic restitution or compensation procedures.” CSA, supra note 4, Art. 5.

⁸ See id., Art. 2.

⁹ See Monetary Gold Removed from Rome in 1943 (Italy v. Fr., UK, & U.S.), 1954 ICJ REP. 19 (June 15) (Court finding that it had no jurisdiction to decide a case in which Albanian interests in the gold were manifest, but in which Albania was not a party).

¹⁰ CSA Article 3(1) provides:

¹¹ In October 1996, Albania paid the United Kingdom the sum of $2 million in settlement of the Corfu Channel judgment, in which the International Court of Justice had found Albania responsible for the sinking of two British destroyers. See Corfu Channel (UK v. Alb.), 1949 ICJ Rep. 4 (Apr. 9).

¹² For more on the connection between lump sum agreements and releases of blocked assets, see Weston Et Al., supra note 3, at 87 n.46.

¹³ In October 1996, the Tripartite Commission released to Albania 1550 kilograms of gold, valued at $19 million. See 1996 Y.B. FCSC 10, available at http://www.justice.gov/fcsc/readingroom/96yearbook.pdf.

¹⁴ CSA, supra note 4, Art. 4.

¹⁵ The International Claims Settlement Act [ICSA], 22 U.S.C. §1623(a)(l)(B), provides:

¹⁶ CSA, supra note 4, Art. 6; see also 1995 Y.B. FCSC 15.

¹⁷ The Commission subsequently extended the deadline for filing claims on numerous occasions. See 1998 FCSC Ann. Rep. 10; 1999 FCSC Ann. Rep. 11. The Commission’s annual reports (from 1998 on) are available at http://www.justice.gov/fcsc/publications.html. As of the end of 1999, the Albania claims program was closed, even though a substantial balance remained from the $2 million lump sum payment. The Commission believed that the two primary causes of this surplus were that some potential claimants decided to have recourse to the domestic Albanian mechanisms for compensation and that many deserving claimants were dual nationals whose claims were barred by the restrictive proviso of Agreed Minute (1) of the CSA. See 1999 FCSC Ann. Rep. 12. Proposals to return the surplus funds to Albania were rejected because section 8(a) of ICSA Title I prohibited such a transfer. See ICSA, 22 U.S.C. §1627(a)(2) (“[A]ll amounts covered into the Treasury to the credit of the aforesaid funds are permanently appropriated for the making of the payments authorized by section 1626 of this title.”).

¹⁸ See 1995 Y.B. FCSC 16.

¹⁹ See id; 1996 FCSC Ann. Rep. 10.

²⁰ All of the Commission’s decisions under the Albania claims program are available online. See http://www.justice.gov/fcsc/readingroom/index.html. In this article, all such decisions will be referred to both by claim number (Claim No.) and by decision number (Dec. No.).

²¹ See 2000 FCSC Ann. Rep. 11. The 2000 figures were adjusted by awards issued in 2005 and 2007. But these figures may still be low because they do not include amounts awarded in other decisions issued after 2000. See infra note 155 and accompanying text.

²² Pub. L. 87-846, 76 Stat. 1107 (1962) (codified at 50 U.S.C, app. §§2017-2017p).

²³ See Foreign Claims Settlement Commission, Decisions and Annotations 567(1 968) [herein after FCSC Dec. & Ann.].

²⁴ See id. at 662-63 (citing Claim of Peter, Claim No. W-7624, Dec. No. W-9424; Claim of Kamberis, Claim No. W-6715, Dec. No. W-9509; Claim of Sheh, Claim No. W-6073, Dec. No. W-16962); Claim of Papanickolas, Claim No. W-537, Dec. No. W-16495).

²⁵ The same was true in relation to rulings made under the Italy claims program, conducted under Title III of the ICSA. This program encompassed losses by U.S. nationals from war damages by Italy during World War II, sustained in areas outside of Italy. See 1995 Y.B. FCSC 34-35. These areas included Italian-occupied Albania. See Claim of Tellios, Claim No. ALB-173, Dec. No. ALB-225 (Amended Final Decision), at 7-9 (FCSC Mar. 12, 1999).

²⁶ See Claim of Vulpe, Claim No. ALB-007, Dec. No. ALB-158 (Proposed Decision), at 3-7 (FCSC Dec. 16, 1996); Claim of Gatses, Claim No. ALB-284, Dec. No. ALB-146 (Proposed Decision), at 3 (FCSC July 1, 1996) (earlier finding that property at issue had not been owned by a U.S. national); Claim of Orhan, Claim No. ALB-245, Dec. No. ALB-278 (Proposed Decision), at 4-5 (FCSC Feb. 24, 1997) (earlier finding that claimant was not a U.S. national); Claim of Kales, Claim Nos. ALB-318, 319 & 322, Dec. No. ALB-309 (Final Decision), at 3-4, 6-7 (FCSC Mar. 12, 1999).

²⁷ See, e.g., Claim of Sheh, Claim No. ALB-181, Dec. No. ALB-294 (Proposed Decision), at 3 n.1 (FCSC Feb. 24, 1997) (fraudulent filing made under the war claims program).

²⁸ CSA, supra note 4, Art. 1(a).

²⁹ SfŕClaim of Panariti, Claim No. ALB-335, Dec. No. ALB-319 (Proposed Decision), at 2-3,8 (FCSC Jan. 25, 2007); Claim of Panos, Claim No. ALB-010, Dec.No. ALB-210 (Proposed Decision), at 4 (FCSCNov. 18,1996).

³⁰ See Claim of Zoto, Claim No. ALB-178, Dec. No. ALB-200 (Final Decision), at 14 (FCSC Dec. 15, 1998).

³¹ See Claim of Melka, Claim No. ALB-240, Dec. No. ALB-178 (Proposed Decision), at 1 п.* (FCSC Oct. 7, 1996) (noting German taking of three thousand gold coins); Claim of Pano, Claim No. ALB-248, Dec. No. ALB-168 (Proposed Decision), at 4 (FCSC Nov. 18, 1996).

³² See Claim of Pano, supra note 31, at 4 (“The Settlement Agreement between the governments of the United States and Albania covers only losses suffered at the hands of the Communist regime in that country.”); see also Claim of Delle, Claim No. ALB-115, Dec. No. ALB-239 (Final Decision), at 4 п.* (FCSC Apr. 15, 1997).

³³ CSA, supra note 4, Art. 1(a).

³⁴ See Claim of Near East Foundation, Claim No. ALB-244, Dec. No. ALB-155 (Final Decision), at 3 (FCSC Feb. 24, 1997) (“The government in power in Albania in 1939 was forcibly imposed on the country by the occupying Italian army, and thus was not a legitimate successor of the government of King Zog, which it displaced.”).

³⁵ Id.

³⁶ See Crawford, James, The Creation of States in International Law 75, 78-83 (2d ed. 2006)Google Scholar; Brad R. Roth, Governmental Illegitimacy in International Law (2000); Acts of a Puppet State or of Localde Facto Government, in 8 Marjorie M. Whiteman, Digest Of International Law 835-36 (1967); see also French Indemnity of ‘1831, in 5 John Bassett Moore, International Adjudications (Modern Series) 4447, 4472 (1933) (noting that the Netherlands, as the Batavian Republic, was not responsible for acts while occupied by Imperial France).

³⁷ CSA, supra note 4, Art. 4. The only stipulation as to a substantive legal rule to be applied by the Commission was contained in Agreed Minute (1) concerning the eligibility of dual nationals to bring claims pursuant to the CSA. This stipulation will be discussed further below. See infra notes 63-79 and accompanying text.

³⁸ 22 U.S.C. § 1623(a)(2).

³⁹ See, e.g., Claim of Kasem, Claim No. ALB-005, Dec. No. ALB-292 (Final Decision), at 5 (FCSC May 4, 1998).

⁴⁰ See, e.g., Claim of Grigori, Claim No. ALB-045, Dec. No. ALB-232 (Final Decision), at 2 (FCSC Feb. 24, 1997).

⁴¹ But see Claim of Poni, Claim No. ALB-291, Dec. No. ALB-264(R) (Amended Proposed Decision), at 4 (FCSC Jan. 24, 2008) (indicating that under Albanian law, so-called certificates of family composition, issued by a village mayor, had no valid legal effect as documentation of title to land).

⁴² See, e.g., Claim of Mengri, Claim No. ALB-288, Dec. No. ALB-262(R) (Amended Proposed Decision), at 3 п.* (FCSC Nov. 29, 2007) (Wisconsin law); Claim of Hoda, Claim No. ALB-299, Dec. No. ALB-265(R) (Amended Proposed Decision), at 3 п.* (FCSC Dec. 14, 2006) (Connecticut law); Claim of Menka, Claim No. ALB-316, Dec. No. ALB-306(R) (Amended Final Decision), at 3 n.2 (FCSC Jan. 25, 2007) (Illinois law); Claim of Pananti, supra note 29, at 6-7 (Massachusetts law).

⁴³ See, e.g., Claim of Vasil, Claim No. ALB-022, Dec. No. ALB-137 (Proposed Decision), at 5 (FCSC Jan. 28, 1997); Claim of Dema, Claim No. ALB-023, Dec. No. ALB-011 (Final Decision), at 5 (FCSC Apr. 15, 1997); Claim of Prifti, Claim No. ALB-054, Dec. No. ALB-157 (Proposed Decision), at 6 (FCSC Dec. 16,1996); Claim of Buri, Claim No. ALB-203, Dec. No. ALB-257 (Final Decision), at 6 (FCSC Sept. 18, 1998); Claim of Hodo, Claim No. ALB-294, Dec. No. ALB-213 (Proposed Decision), at 6 (FCSC Nov. 18, 1996).

⁴⁴ See Claim of Pananti, supra note 29, at 5 & n.2.

⁴⁵ See Claim of Dema, supra note 43, at 5 (noting that customary Code of Leka was preempted by Civil Code provision); Claim of Gregory, Claim No. ALB-221, Dec. No. ALB-204 (Final Decision), at 2 (FCSC Feb. 24, 1997).

⁴⁶ See Lillich, Richard B. & Bederman, David J., Jurisprudence of the Foreign claims Settlement Commission: Iran Claims, 91 AJIL 436, 440 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

⁴⁷ 45 C.F.R. §509.5(b) (2010) (previously 45 C.F.R. §531.6(d)).

⁴⁸ CSA, supra note 4, Art. 1(a).

⁴⁹ Id.

⁵⁰ A “national of the United States” is “a person who, though not a citizen of the United States, owes permanent allegiance to the United States.” 8 U.S.C. §1101 (a)(22)(B). For more on the distinction between nationals and citizens in the practice of the Commission, see Claim of Notis, Claim No. ALB-160, Dec. No. ALB-077 (Proposed Decision), at 2-5 (FCSC Mar. 4, 1996).

⁵¹ Claim of Jazxhi, Claim No. ALB-001, Dec. No. ALB-001 (Proposed Decision), at 2-3 (FCSC Nov. 27,1995) (the first decision issued by the Commission for the Albania claims program); see also Claim of Lazaris, Claim No. ALB-336, Dec. No. ALB-318 (Proposed Decision), at 3 (FCSC Aug. 31, 2006) (identical language) (among the last of the decisions issued for the program).

⁵² See Claim of Stefani, Claim No. ALB-074, Dec. No. ALB-173 (Proposed Decision), at 3 (FCSC Dec. 16, 1996) (“Although the claimant has not submitted a copy of his father’s Certificate of Naturalization, based on the evidence in the record, the Commission draws the logical inference that claimant’s father, Theodore J. Stephens, acquired United States nationality by naturalization at some point prior to claimant’s birth . . . .”); Claim of Cifligu, Claim No. ALB-210, Dec. No. ALB-191 (Final Decision), at 2 (FCSC Feb. 24, 1997); Claim of Tite, Claim No. ALB-296, Dec. No. ALB-274 (Proposed Decision), at 3 (FCSC Feb. 24, 1997).

⁵³ See Claim of Kostreci, Claim No. ALB-059, Dec. No. ALB-124 (Proposed Decision), at 2 (FCSC May 7, 1996); Claim of Kurd, Claim No. ALB-164, Dec. No. ALB-042 (Proposed Decision), at 2 (FCSC Mar. 4, 1996); Claim of Velaj, Claim No. ALB-328, Dec. No. ALB-311 (Final Decision), at 4 (FCSC Apr. 7, 2005) (noting that a declaration of intent to become a U.S. citizen is not conclusive as to nationality).

⁵⁴ See Redick, Charles Ford, Jurisprudence of the Foreign Claims Settlement Commission: Chinese Claims, 67 AJIL 728, 733—34 (1973)CrossRefGoogle Scholar. It is important to recognize that the continuous nationality rule does not require that a claim be held by the same U.S. national for the relevant period. See]. Brown, Jeffrey, The Jurisprudence of the Foreign Claims Settlement Commission: Vietnam Claims, 27 Va. J. Int’l L. 99, 113 & n.79 (1986)Google Scholar. For more on the role of assignments of claims and the character of corporate claims in compliance with the continuous nationality rule, see id. at 113-14.

⁵⁵ See, e.g., Cuban Claims Act of l964, Pub. L. 88-666, 78 Stat. 1110, 1111 (1964), as amended by 80 Stat. 1365 (1965) (codified at 22 U.S.C. §§1643-1643m (1970)); Vietnam Claims Act, Pub. L. No. 96-606, 94 Stat. 3534 (codified at 22 U.S.C. §§1645-1645o (2006)); Foreign Relations Authorization Act, Pub. L. No. 99-93, tit. V, 99 Stat. 437 (1985) (codified at 50 U.S.C. §1701 note).

⁵⁶ Redick, supra note 54, at 734. For the origins of the continuous nationality rule, see 5 Moore, supra note 36, at 351 (report dated December 30, 1835, of U.S. and French commission established under July 1831 Convention as to Claims and Duties on Wines and Cotton). For criticisms of the continuous nationality rule, see Freidberg, Sidney, Unjust and Outmoded—The Doctrine of Continuous Nationality in International Claims , 4 Int’l Law. 835 (1970)Google Scholar (The author was a commissioner of the FCSC).

⁵⁷ See Freidberg, supra note 56, at 844-45 (discussing second Italy claims program, in which claims by “late nationals” (those that acquired U.S. citizenship after their claims arose) were allowed in limited circumstances).

⁵⁸ Claim of Panagiotis, Claim No. ALB-015, Dec. No. ALB-195 (Final Decision), at 5 (FCSC Feb. 24, 1997).

⁵⁹ See id. (“In this case, inheritance through claimant’s mother (a non-U.S. national) broke the continuity of U.S. ownership of part of the claim.”); see also Claim of Cifligu, supra note 52, at 4 n.2.

⁶⁰ Claim of Babameto, Claim No. ALB-333, Dec. No. ALB-317 (Final Decision), at 4 (FCSC Jan. 25, 2007).

⁶¹ Id. at 5.

⁶² See supra note 57.

⁶³ See 1996 Y.B. FCSC 11 (calling the dual national question “[o]ne of the most vexing issues facing the Com mission”).

⁶⁴ CSA, supra note 4, Agreed Minute, para. 1. For comment on notation see supra note 5.

⁶⁵ In a lump sum settlement concluded between the United States and Egypt, May 1, 1976, 4 UST 4214, TIAS No. 8446, an Agreed Minute provided that the United States “recognizes and applies the principle of international law concerning the dominant and effective nationality of dual nationals.” See Weston et al., supra note 3, at 30-31, 235.

⁶⁶ See 1996 Y.B. FCSC 11 (noting that the constitutionality issue was referred to the Department of State and the Department of Justice’s Office of Legal Counsel).

⁶⁷ See Merge Claim (U.S. v. Italy), 22 ILR 443, 455 (U.S.-Italian Conciliation Comm’n 1955); Iran v. United States, Case No. A/18, 5 Iran-U.S. Cl. Trib. Rep. 251, 265 (1984); see also Weston et al., supra note 3, at 31-33; Bederman, David J., Eligible Claimants Before the Iran-United States Claims Tribunal, in Llllich, Richard B. & Magraw, Daniel B., The Iran-United States Claims Tribunal: Its Contribution to the Law of State Responsibility 47, 65-86 (1998)Google Scholar.

⁶⁸ Case No. A/18, 5 Iran-U.S. Cl. Trib. Rep. at 265.

⁶⁹ See 1996 Y.B. FCSC 11.

⁷⁰ See, e.g., Claim of Poni, Claim No. ALB-291, Dec. No. ALB-264 (Proposed Decision), at 4 (FCSC Jan. 28, 1997) (“Nor is there any evidence that the owner of the claim (claimant’s father-in law; then, after his death, claim ant’s husband; then, after his death, claimant herself) lived in the United States for at least half of the approximately 50 years between the expropriation in 1945 and the effective date of the Settlement Agreement, April 18, 1995.”); see also Claim of Gjerazi, Claim No. ALB-290, Dec. No. ALB-263 (Proposed Decision), at 6 n.2 (FCSC Jan. 28, 1997) (calculation of time under Agreed Minute (1), prong 2).

⁷¹ See Claim of Filipi, Claim No. ALB-119 & 161, Dec. No. ALB-275 (Proposed Decision), at 5 (FCSC Feb. 24, 1997) (“The three claimants mentioned are dual U.S.-Albanian nationals . . . because their father was an Albanian citizen. Under Albanian law, claimants retain Albanian nationality notwithstanding their U.S. nationality by birth.”).

⁷² See, e.g., Claim of Kapbardhi, Claim No. ALB-089, Dec. No. ALB-273 (Proposed Decision), at 5 (FCSC Feb. 24, 1997) (satisfied Agreed Minute (1), prong 2); Claim of Puto, Claim No. ALB-100, Dec. No. ALB-293(R) (Amended Final Decision), at 2-4 (FCSC June 29, 2006) (satisfied Agreed Minute (1), prong 1); Claim of Bace, Claim No. ALB-112, Dec. No. ALB-249 (Final Decision), at 2 (FCSC Apr. 15, 1997) (satisfied prong 1); Claim of Filipi, supra note 71, at 6 (some claimants satisfied prong 1); Claim of Buri, supra note 43, at 2 (satisfied prong 1); Claim of Dedo, Claim No. ALB-326, Dec. No. ALB-310 (Proposed Decision), at 3 (FCSC Apr. 3, 2000) (satisfied prong 1 ).

⁷³ See Claim of Constas, Claim No. ALB-080, Dec. No. ALB-270 (Final Decision), at 3 (FCSC Apr. 16, 1998); Claim of Berberi, Claim No. ALB-113, Dec. No. ALB-176 (Proposed Decision), at 3 (FCSC Dec. 16, 1996); see also 1996 FCSC Y.B. at 11 (“Although [many claimants] considered themselves United States nationals and likely would have taken up residence in the United States after World War II if they could have done so, the oppressive, isolationist Communist regime that took power in 1944 prevented them from leaving. Moreover, even after the fall of the Communist regime in 1991, most were so desperately poor that they could not amass sufficient funds to finance their travel to the United States before April 1995.”).

⁷⁴ Claim of Constas, supra note 73, at 3.

⁷⁵ Claim of Blushi, Claim No. ALB-026, Dec. No. ALB-241(R) (Amended Proposed Decision), at 2 (FCSC Nov. 16, 2006); see also 2006 FCSC Ann. Rep. 8.

⁷⁶ See CSA, supra note 4, Art. 2.

⁷⁷ See 1998 FCSC Ann. Rep. 9 (noting that program was suspended in 1997 but resumed in February 1998).

⁷⁸ This review was presumably undertaken pursuant to the Commission’s authority to reopen final decisions. See 45 C.F.R. §531.5(1); see also Claim of Harris, Claim No. CZ-3663, Dec. No. CZ-2144, 17 FCSC Semiann. Rep. 274 (July-Dec. 1962); Claim of Kaputsik, Claim No. CZ-4617, Dec. No. CZ-1151, 17 FCSC Semiann Rep. at 243 (joinder of new claimants).

⁷⁹ Amended decisions were issued for the following claim numbers: 26, 27,29, 37, 58, 69,78, 80, 83, 100, 112, 119, 161, 169, 174, 178, 232, 279, 288, 291, 295, 299, 304, 307, 308, and 316. For an overall appraisal of the Agreed Minute, see infra notes 168-69 and accompanying text.

⁸⁰ CSA, supra note 4, Art. 1 (a) (recognizing the “claims of United States nationals (including natural and juridical persons)”).

⁸¹ See supra notes 34-36 and accompanying text.

⁸² Claim of Near East Foundation, Claim No. ALB-244, Dec. No. ALB-155 (Proposed Decision), at 2 (FCSC Aug. 16, 1996).

⁸³ Claim of Near East Foundation, supra note 34, at 1.

⁸⁴ See Claim No. V-0261, Dec. No. V-0439 (Proposed Decision) (FCSC Aug. 22, 1985); see also Brown, supra note 54, at 109.

⁸⁵ See Claim of Prifti, supra note 43, at 5- 6 (“In order for the Commission to consider such assignments as transferring compensable interests of the claimant’s siblings to the claimant, the assignors must first establish their United States nationality as of the date of their father’s death in 1955. They have not done so.”).

⁸⁶ See, e.g., Claim of Femera, Claim No. ALB-042, Dec. No. ALB-290 (Proposed Decision), at 7 (FCSC Feb. 24,1997); Claim of Elias, Claim No. ALB-117, Dec. No. ALB-206 (Final Decision), at 3 (FCSC Dec. 15,1998); Claim of Zotos, Claim No. ALB-146, Dec. No. ALB-209 (Final Decision), at 4 (FCSC Oct. 29, 1998); Claim of Liolin, Claim No. ALB-187, Dec. No. ALB-236 (Final Decision), at 6 (FCSC Oct. 29, 1998).

⁸⁷ See Bederman, David J., Beneficial Ownership of International Claims, 38 Int’l & Comp. L. Q. 935 (1989)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Brown, supra note 54, at 112 (discussing Vietnam claims program’s treatment of beneficial ownership issues).

⁸⁸ See Claim of Fazo, Claim No. ALB-106, Dec. No. ALB-186 (Proposed Decision), at 3-4 (FCSC Oct. 7, 1996).

⁸⁹ Claim of Pantos, Claim No. ALB-247, Dec. No. ALB-228 (Final Decision), at 4 (FCSC Oct. 29, 1998).

⁹⁰ Claim of Jones, Claim No. ALB-300, Dec. No. ALB-227 (Proposed Decision), at 2-4 (FCSC Feb. 24,1997); see also Claim of Godellas, Claim No. ALB-332, Dec. No. ALB-316 (Proposed Decision), at 2-5 (FCSC Sept. 29, 2005) (claimant’s mother, a non-U.S. national, was record owner of the subject property, not merely an “administrator” acting on behalf of claimant); Claim of Babameto, Claim No. ALB-333, Dec. No. ALB-317 (Final Decision), at 2 (FCSC Jan. 25,2007) (same, except that non-U.S. mother was asserted by claimant to be merely an executor for the father’s estate).

⁹¹ CSA, supra note 4, Art. 1(a).

⁹² See Lillich & Bederman, supra note 46, at 442-52 (for Iran claims program practice on attribution); Brown, supra note 54, at 103 (Vietnam claims program); Redick, supra note 54, at 730 (China claims program).

⁹³ CSA, supra note 4, Art. 1(a).

⁹⁴ See supra notes 31-36 and accompanying text.

⁹⁵ For the timing requirements for other claims programs, see Brown, supra note 54, at 106 (statutory scheme for timing of Vietnam claims); Redick, supra note 54, at 730-31 (China claims).

⁹⁶ See, e.g., Claim of Krotsis, Claim No. ALB-197, Dec. No. ALB-127 (Proposed Decision), at 2 (FCSC May 7, 1996).

⁹⁷ See Claim of Rrapi, Claim No. ALB-329, Dec. No. ALB-313 (Proposed Decision), at 5 (FCSC Dec. 30,2004).

⁹⁸ See Claim of Prifti, supra note 43, at 7.

⁹⁹ See Claim of Kasem, supra note 39, at 4.

¹⁰⁰ See Claim of Toma, Claim No. ALB-072, Dec. No. ALB-268 (Final Decision), at 4 (FCSC Jan. 11,1999) (reform law of Nov. 8, 1955); Claim of Gjeli, Claim No. ALB-220, Dec. No. ALB-286 (Final Decision) (Corrected), at 4 (FCSC Feb. 5, 1999).

¹⁰¹ See, e.g., Claim of Puto, Claim No. ALB-100, Dec. No. ALB-293 (Proposed Decision), at 7-8 (FCSC Feb. 24, 1997) (Art. 4/1, Law No. 372, Dec. 12, 1946); Claim of Toma, supra note 100, at 4 (Prime Minister Order No. 20, Sept. 2,1957); Claim of Stefani, supra note 52, at 3-4 (Decision No. 24 of Mar. 13,1957); Claim of Toliko, Claim No. ALB-118, Dec. No. ALB-139 (Proposed Decision), at 3-5 (FCSC Jan. 28, 1997) (Dec. 1, 1963 Decree No. 291 for district of Korce); Claim of Qano, Claim No. ALB-150, Dec. No. ALB-285 (Proposed Decision), at 7 (FCSC Feb. 24, 1997) (Apr. 20, 1946 decree nationalizing pharmacies); id. at 5-6 (Mar. 14, 1980, Decree No. 40, local nationalization); Claim of Stefani, Claim No. ALB-267, Dec. No. ALB-211 (Proposed Decision), at 4 (FCSC Nov. 18, 1996) (establishment of local agricultural collective).

¹⁰² See, e.g., Claim of Mengri, Claim No. ALB-288, Dec. No. ALB-262(R) (Amended Proposed Decision), at 4 (FCSC Nov. 29,2007) (“In the absence of a precise date, the taking will be deemed to have occurred as of January 1, 1947.”); Claim of Lakuriqi, Claim No. ALB-307, Dec. No. ALB-289 (Final Decision), at 3 (FCSC Apr. 15, 1997).

¹⁰³ See Lillich & Bederman, supra note 46, at 453 (on the practice for the Iran claims program).

¹⁰⁴ See Claim of Papa, Claim No. ALB-037, Dec. No. ALB-297 (Proposed Decision), at 5 (FCSC Feb. 24,1997).

¹⁰⁵ See Claim of Leka, Claim No. ALB-093, Dec. No. ALB-185 (Proposed Decision), at 4 (FCSC Nov. 18, 1996).

¹⁰⁶ See Claim of Velaj, supra note 53, at 5; Claim of Lazaris, supra note 51, at 4.

¹⁰⁷ See Claim of Zoto, supra note 30, at 8 (subclaim 4); see also id. at 17-19 (subclaim 10). In what might be regarded as an “intervention . . . affecting property rights” under CSA Article 1, the Albanian government refused to pay amounts due to the claimant on “blocked goods” that it had impounded. The Commission found that because the government acknowledged the debt, it was attributable to Albania and compensable. See id. at 10-12 (subclaim 6).

¹⁰⁸ See, e.g., Claim of Karselas, Claim No. ALB-032, 034, 035 & 043, Dec. No. ALB-113 (Proposed Decision), at 4 (FCSC Mar. 4, 1996); Claim of Pano, supra note 31, at 5-6 (“ [T]o enable the Commission to properly calculate the extent of the loss, the Commission must have some evidence—for example, old letters or sworn written statements of former neighbors or villagers with personal knowledge of the events—concerning approximately when and how the property was taken.”).

¹⁰⁹ Claim of Demma, Claim No. ALB-027, Dec. No. ALB-013 (Amended Proposed Decision), at 5 (FCSC Nov. 18, 1996).

¹¹⁰ See, e.g., Claim of Panajoti, Claim Nos. ALB-099 & 167, Dec. No. ALB-276 (Final Decision), at 6 (FCSC May 4, 1998); Claim of Stevens, Claim No. ALB-268, Dec. No. ALB-299 (Final Decision), at 4 (FCSC Apr. 16, 1998).

¹¹¹ See Claim of Pano, supra note 31, at 6 n. 1 (“The Commission could not make an award in the absence of this information [concerning whether claimants had received restitution or compensation from the Albanian government].”).

¹¹² See CSA, supra note 4, Agreed Minute, para. 3 (“Recognizing that Albania is administering a domestic program for compensation and restitution of certain properties, the United States and Albania agreed to exchange information concerning the claims brought under the Albanian program by United States nationals covered by the agreement, as well as information concerning any compensation or restitution provided, in order to assist in avoiding double recovery by claimants.”).

¹¹³ See Claim of Liolin, supra note 86, at 2 n.2.

¹¹⁴ See, e.g., Claim of Generalis, Claim No. ALB-217, Dec. No. ALB-069 (Final Decision), at 5 (FCSC Feb. 24, 1997); Claim of Liolin, Claim No. ALB-187, Dec. No. ALB-236 (Proposed Decision), at 10-11 (FCSC Jan. 27, 1997); Claim of Raci, Claim No. ALB-261, Dec. No. ALB-277 (Proposed Decision), at 8 (FCSC Feb. 24, 1997); see also Claim of Velaj, supra note 53, at 3 n.4 (commission established by Law 9235 of July 29, 2004).

¹¹⁵ See, e.g., Claim of Conservative Baptist Foreign Mission Society, Claim No. ALB-079 (Order), at 1-3 (FCSC Nov. 18, 1996); see also CSA, supra note 4, Agreed Minute, para. 2 (“Recognizing that the Conservative Baptist Mission Society wishes to obtain restitution of its properties in Albania under Albanian law, rather than receiving compensation therefor under the agreement, and without prejudice to the validity of its claims, any claim by the Conservative Baptist Mission Society for the following three parcels of property in or near Korcha, Albania shall be considered not to have been settled under articles 1 and 2 . . . .”).

¹¹⁶ See, e.g., Claim of Piazza, Claim No. ALB-301, Dec. No. ALB-226 (Proposed Decision), at 6 (FCSC Feb. 24, 1997).

¹¹⁷ See, e.g., Claim of Cifligu, Claim No. ALB-078, Dec. No. ALB-245(R) (Order), at 1-2 (FCSC Jan. 25,2007); Claim of Kona, Claim No. ALB-189 (Order) (FCSC July 1, 1996).

¹¹⁸ Claim of Puto, supra note 101, at 9 (citing Claim of Estate of Alexander, Claim No. G-2886, Dec. No. G-1874 (1980)); see also Claim of Stevens, supra note 110, at 4. For more on this standard, sometimes referred to as the Hull Rule, see Restatement (Third) of the Foreign Relations Law of the United States §712, cmt. с (1987).

¹¹⁹ But see Claim of Stevens, supra note 110, at 7 (After conducting a detailed accounting, the Commission concluded that “claimants benefited more from regaining ownership of the property in 1994 than they would have from receiving an award to compensate them for the taking of the property in 1947 plus loss of use.”).

¹²⁰ For the Albania claims program, the Commission issued 92 decisions with awards (out of a total of 337 filed). For each decision with an award, a valuation analysis was made.

¹²¹ See 22 U.S.C. § 1623(a) (2)(B) (“In determining the value of a claim under international law, the Commission shall award the fair market value of the property as of the time of the taking by the foreign government involved (without regard to any action or event that occurs after the taking), except that the value of the claim shall not reflect any diminution in value attributable to actions which are carried out, or threats of action which are made, by the foreign government with respect to the property before the taking.”); see generally Lillich, Richard B., The Valuation of Nationalized Property by the Foreign Chims Settlement Commission, in 1 The Valuation Of Nationalized Property in International Law 95 (Lillich, Richard B. ed., 1972)Google Scholar.

¹²² See, e.g., Claim of Panos, Claim No. ALB-010, Dec. No. ALB-210 (Final Decision), at 2 (FCSC Apr. 15, 1997) (claimant’s valuation figure “is not supported by any documentation and is wholly inconsistent with the Commission’s study of the values of various kinds of real property in Albania before and during World War II and thereafter”); Claim of Dema, supra note 43, at 5 (noting that “the Commission finds [claimant’s valuation] to be highly inflated and unreasonable”); Claim of Dedo, supra note 72, at 5 (indicating that claimant’s “figures are seriously exaggerated”).

¹²³ See 1995 Y.B. FCSC 16; 1996 FCSC Ann. Rep. 10.

¹²⁴ See 80 Stat. 1365 (1966) (codified at 22 U.S.C. §l643(a)(2)(B) (1970)) (requiring the Commission to “t into account the basis of valuation most applicable to the property and equitable to the claimant, including but limited to, (i) fair market value, (ii) book value, (iii) going concern value, or (iv) cost of replacement”).

¹²⁵ see also 22 U.S.C. § 1623(a)(2) (В) (indicating primacy of fair market value but then listing other account approaches, including market value of outstanding equity securities, replacement value, going-concern value, Í book value). For more on valuation, see infra notes 145-47 and accompanying text.

¹²⁶ See Redick, supra note 54, at 736-37 (China claims); Brown, supra note 54, at 120-26 (Vietnam clain Lillich & Bederman, supra note 46, at 459-60 (Iran claims).

¹²⁷ But see Claim of Panajoti, supra note 110, at 8 (relying on unspecified precedents from the general war clai program).

¹²⁸ See supra notes 99-102 and accompanying text.

¹²⁹ See Claim of Josifi, Claim No. ALB-224, Dec. No. ALB-237 (Proposed Decision), at 5 (FCSC Jan. 28,19’ (distinction between urban and agricultural property).

¹³⁰ See Claim of Dedo, supra note 72, at 5 (noting that “governmental assessments [of real property] often significantly below actual market value”).

¹³¹ Claim of Hadjiyanis, Claim No. ALB-084, Dec. No. ALB-230 (Proposed Decision), at 4 (FCSC Dec. 1996).

¹³² See id.

¹³³ See supra notes 34-36 and 80-83 and accompanying text.

¹³⁴ See Claim of Near East Foundation, supra note 82, at 2-3.

¹³⁵ See Claim of Pantos, Claim No. ALB-247, Dec. No. ALB-228 (Proposed Decision), at 3 (FCSC Feb. 24, 1997).

¹³⁶ See, e.g., Claim of Panos, supra note 122, at 4 (FCSC Apr. 15, 1997) (“The Commission explained that it could not base an award for livestock and personal property on the statements of claimant alone, without more specific statements from others to support claimant’s assertions.”).

¹³⁷ See Claim of Papa, supra note 104, at 5-6 (calculating value of confiscated currency and coinage based on conversion rates established by standard reference works, including American International Investment Corporation’s World Currency Charts; Claim of Zoto, supra note 30, at 6-7, 9-10.

¹³⁸ See Claim of Zotos, supra note 86, at 7-8 (by “standard local custom,” claimant had two walnut hope chests filled with clothing, household goods, bedsheets, and silverware); Claim of Suxho, Claim No. ALB-317, Dec. No. ALB-307 (Proposed Decision), at 4-5 (FCSC Oct. 29, 1998).

¹³⁹ See supra note 136; see also Brown, supra note 54, at 123-24 (describing Vietnam claims program’s somewhat more sophisticated valuation methodology that rejected replacement cost and featured a depreciation analysis according to a standard schedule).

¹⁴⁰ See supra notes 80-84 and accompanying text.

¹⁴¹ See Claim of Panajoti, supra note 110, at 3, 7.

¹⁴² See id. at 9; see also Claim of Xexo, Claim No. ALB-174, Dec. No. ALB-256(R) (Amended Proposed Decision), at 3-4 (FCSC Feb. 22, 2007) (failure of proof regarding existence of shop).

¹⁴³ Claim of Panajoti, supra note 110, at 8.

¹⁴⁴ See Claim of Tellios, supra note 25, at 4.

¹⁴⁵ See Claim of Qano, Claim No. ALB-150, Dec. No. ALB-285 (Final Decision), at 2-3 (FCSC Apr. 15, 1997).

¹⁴⁶ For more on this approach, see Brown, supra note 54, at 129-39 (Vietnam claims program practice and congressional reaction).

¹⁴⁷ See Pub. L. No. 99-451, § 1(a)(2) (codified at 22 U.S.C. §1623(a)(2)(B)) (“Fair market value shall be ascertained in accordance with the method most appropriate to the property taken and equitable to the claimant, including#x2014; . . . ((iii) going-concern value (which includes consideration of an enterprise’s profitability)!.]”).

¹⁴⁸ See supra notes 21, 39-40, and accompanying text.

¹⁴⁹ See Weston et al., supra note 3, at 81-82 n.21 (reviewing Commission practice for earlier programs, inning those for China, Cuba, Egypt, Ethiopia, and Iran).

¹⁵⁰ See, e.g., Claim of Kasem, supra note 39, at 5.

¹⁵¹ Claim of Cheli, Claim No. ALB-017, Dec. No. ALB-218 (Final Decision), at 2 (FCSC Apr. 15, 199:

¹⁵² Claim of Prifti, Claim No. ALB-054, Dec. No. ALB-157 (Final Decision), at 5 п.* (FCSC Apr. 15. 1997).

¹⁵³ Claim of Puto, supra note 101, at 8.

¹⁵⁴ The Albania claims program is by no means the smallest that the Commission has conducted. In the Ethiopia claims program, the Commission rendered forty-five decisions and issued awards in twenty-seven. In the Egypt claims program, the Commission rendered eighty-five decisions and issued awards in eighty-three. See 2010 FCSC Ann. Rep. 14-15.

¹⁵⁵ See 2000 FCSC Ann. Rep. 11; see also http://www.justice.gov/fcsc/readingroom/page7.htm.

¹⁵⁶ See CSA, supra note 4, Art. 2.

¹⁵⁷ See International Claims Settlement Act of 1949, tit. I, §§5, 7, 8, Pub. L. No. 81-455, 64 Stat. 12 (1950) (codified as amended at 22 U.S.C. §§1624, 1626, 1627); see also 1997 FCSC Ann. Rep. 53 (payments made promptly from the appropriate Treasury account); Brown, supra note 54, at 141-43 (comparing the rates of receipt of awards for various earlier claims programs; on average, claimants received only 40 percent of amounts awarded by the Commission).

¹⁵⁸ The Commission did actually suggest as much. See 1999 FCSC Ann. Rep. 8-9 (noting that the residency requirement “constrained the Commission to deny some fifty claims that otherwise would have been compensable”).

¹⁵⁹ See 45 C.F.R. 531.5(1) (2010) (superseding id. 509(1)) (allowing the Commission to reopen final decisions either upon a showing of exigent circumstances by claimant or (presumably) sua sponte by the Commission itself).

¹⁶⁰ See claim of Panajoti, Claim Nos. ALB-130, 131,132, Dec. No. ALB-267 (Memorandum), at 1 (FCSC Aug. 15, 2007) (an internal memo from the Commission’s deputy chief counsel to the commissioners concerning the review process in the wake of the formal Diplomatic Note in 2006, see supra note 75 and accompanying text; claim rejected because of failure of proof of nationality); Claim of Zguro, Claim No. ALB-103, Dec. No. ALB-247 (Memorandum), at 1 (FCSC July 12, 2007) (same).

¹⁶¹ See Weston et al., supra note 3, at 341 (Claims Settlement Agreement, U.S.-Vietnam, Jan. 28, 1995, Art. 1 (a)) (nearly identical language with U.S-Albania agreement); id. at 299 (Compensation Agreement, U.S.-Eth., Dec. 19, 1985, Arts. 1, 2, TIAS No. 11193, 25 ILM 56(1986)) (different formulation of compensable claims from that of U.S.-Albania agreement but having substantively the same result); id. at 235 (Claims Settlement Agreement U.S.-Egypt, May 1, 1976, Arts. 2-3, 4 UST 4214, TÍAS No. 8446) (different formulation of compensable claims from that of U.S.-Albania agreement but having substantively the same result).

¹⁶² See supra note 77 and accompanying text.

¹⁶³ See Claim of Suli, Claim No. ALB-102, Dec. No. ALB-291 (Final Decision), at 2n .l (FCSC May 4, 1998).

¹⁶⁴ See supra note 47 and accompanying text.

¹⁶⁵ Claim of Suli, supra note 163, at 2 n. 1 (noting that “domestic turmoil in Albania impeded the efforts of many claimants to obtain evidence to support objections”); see also supra note 24 and accompanying text.

¹⁶⁶ See supra notes 50-62 and accompanying text.

¹⁶⁷ See supra notes 87-90 and accompanying text.

¹⁶⁸ See supra notes 63-79.

¹⁶⁹ See supra notes 67-68 and accompanying text.

¹⁷⁰ See supra notes 31-36 and accompanying text.

¹⁷¹ See supra notes 96-98, 107, and accompanying text.

¹⁷² CSA, supra note 4, Art. 1(a).

¹⁷³ See supra notes 108-10 and accompanying text.

¹⁷⁴ See also supra notes 28-30, 115-19, and accompanying text.

¹⁷⁵ See supra notes 120-30 and accompanying text.

¹⁷⁶ See Lillich & Bederman, supra note 46, at 439-40, 463-65.

¹⁷⁷ See also supra notes 131-39 and accompanying text.

¹⁷⁸ See supra notes 140-47 and accompanying text.

¹⁷⁹ 22 U.S.C. §1623(a)(l)(B).

¹⁸⁰ Pub. L. No. 110-301, 122 Stat. 2999; see also Exec. Order No. 13, 477 (Oct. 31, 2008) (noting that under section 1(a), claims of U.S. nationals are espoused by the United States and referred to the secretary of state).

¹⁸¹ See 2008 FCSC Ann. Rep. 7.

¹⁸² See 2009 FCSC Ann. Rep. 10. (The referral occurred pursuantto 22 U.S.C. § 1623(a)(1)(C), not the generic provision 1623(a)(1)(B).)

¹⁸³ See http://www.justice.gov/fcsc/readingroom/index.html.

¹⁸⁴ For a brief introduction to Britain’s Foreign Compensation Commission, see Foreign Compensation Commission, Fifty- Fourth Annual Report (for the financial year ending March 31,2009), available at http://www.official-documents.gov.uk/document/cm77/7786/7786.pdf.