Russian Empire legal successor

[Student of History]

Assuming that Time magazine correctly report via checking Russian archives re: purchase of /payment for Church from the state purse....
enter the role of the church in post revolutionary Russia/ USSR and Russian Federation.
It's definitely an interesting prospect re: continuity of property given the changing role / perception of the church by the Soviet  and post Soviet state.  I'm not sure that the authorities concerned have reached a satisfactory agreement of terms as yet.
Interested to hear other's thoughts.
Kind Regards,
SOH

[Naslednik Norvezhskiy]

Assuming that Time magazine correctly report via checking Russian archives re: purchase of /payment for Church from the state purse....

I wouldn't say that's the media's responsibility, but something which ought to be done by the parties in the law suit, to prove or disprove their claim. Evidently a French court has ruled that the cathedral belongs to the Russian state because of convincing evidence that it was paid for by state funds. That the Russian state is so keen on owning a church in a foreign country seems ridiculous to me, but's that's just my opinion.

[Student of History]

Enter another consideration:  There is no such thing as a state owned christian church.  Church/ monastries belong to the church - whatever the denomination. ie: Jerusalem.

[Naslednik Norvezhskiy]

Enter another consideration:  There is no such thing as a state owned christian church.  Church/ monastries belong to the church - whatever the denomination. ie: Jerusalem.

There are state churches which to varying degrees are integrated into the state. But I think that's irrelevant here: After the cathedral was constructed at the expense of the Russian Empire, it was leased for 99 years, not to a church, as I understand it, but to whom? - a lease held by the Association culturelle orthodoxe russe (ACOR) for the last 80 years.

[Student of History]

Tainyi,
There are several points for consideration in a complex scenario such as this. I have not read the terms of the lease, although it doesn't sound dissimilar to some country estate leases I am aware of which permit freedom of use/ never ownership. If the Government pays for works on St Basil's Catheral, does that mean they own it or they are donating funds in support of the church - a recognised self governing entity?
Do the faberge eggs TNII gave as Easter presents to his wife and children belong to the Russian Federation because the Soviet Union claimed all his known personal assets /state purses as their own ?  Does that in turn make anyone who has ever bought a Faberge egg, or piece of imperial jewellery through a Sotheby's auction or off a friend or relative, a thief of the Russian Federation ...?  I say these things to highlight the Pandora's box which has plagued Russia in all its forms since the 1917 revolution.
In respect of the original intent of this thread which I believe richard_1990 was highlighting what he thought evidentiary proof of legal continuity between Russian Empire/ USSR /Russian Federation, perhaps we should look for other similiar examples, Greece or Iran may provide insights not yet considered.
Kind Regards,
SOH

[Nicolay]

I am going to play the devils advocate,
"next to my believe that no church should be owned by any government"

If Russia claims continuation of the Czarist Russia and the Soviet Union,
it is also financially responsible for
"just to give a few examples"
- return of private property
- outstanding Bonds like the "Nicholas Railroad Bonds"
- war crimes
- ................and much more!

[richard_1990]

If Russia claims continuation of the Czarist Russia and the Soviet Union,

It's been recognized internationally since the collapse of the Soviet Union that Russia is it's legal successor. There are various legal precedents for this. And taking into consideration what Vladimir mentioned in his post, there are various incidences set that hold Russia as the legal continuation of Russian Empire.

f Russia claims continuation of the Czarist Russia and the Soviet Union,
it is also financially responsible for
"just to give a few examples"
- return of private property
- outstanding Bonds like the "
- war crimes
- ................and much more!

This is pretty silly. The issue of property confiscated by the Communists is confusing. Various families - who today are still powerful - who had items confiscated have had them returned, ie. the Rothschild family. The proble I see with this is that alot of the major palaces that housed the various noble familes are today either gone or hospitals, schools, libraries and museums - combine that with the fact that the courts are dodgey. The issue of war crimes is silly. Who's going to force Russia to pay reperations of accept responsibility for war crimes committed by the Soviet Union/Russian Empire? War crime tribunals are only ever brought against the vanquished - Nazi Germany, Saddam Hussein, Serbia etc. What about the war crimes commited by the United states in Korea, Vietnam, Iraq?

[richard_1990]

Creditors who hold Czarist debt are asking Russia to pay up:

The Russian government vowed to “defend our rights” after French holders of czarist bonds valued at as much as 100 billion euros ($137 billion) threatened to sue the Kremlin and seize property it owns in Paris.

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=aZ5BaSKkWv6I