Erpilio Trovati was 20 years old when a French gendarme rang the doorbell of his apartment located in Mont-Boron, boulevard Carnot. The letter that the soldier gave him that day – and which followed two summons to which he chose not to respond – asked him to report quickly 3km away. If he does not do so, reprisals may be taken against his family. Shortly after, he taken by force to Nice station on a train that will take him to Germany.
He will work in a factory near Düsseldorf (eastern Germany) for more than 13 months, as part of the Compulsory Labor Service (STO)* established by the Vichy regime (from 1940 to 1944).
80 years later, and after telling his story in our pages, he decided, with the help of his grandson Vivien, to seek recognition and reparation from the State. A legal process which adds to that of Albert Corrieri, a 102-year-old from Marseillais, also deported and forced to work in Germany for 25 months.
***Of the 650,000 young French people sent to Germany as part of the STO, around 250,000 will not return.
Request prescribed?
A first hearing took place this Tuesday, January 14 at the Nice administrative court. “We pleaded the caserelates Erpilio's lawyer Michel Pautot. The public rapporteur concluded that the request was time-barred. Except that Erpilio was deported, there cannot be a statute of limitations, there is imprescriptibility. We have made a request for payment of hours worked during the STO period”.
For this, the lawyer relies on texts, treaties and international conventions which raise this question. It refers in particular to the penal code (article 212-1) and also the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court of 1998 which qualifies as a crime against humanity “any of the acts committed as part of a widespread or systematic attack launched against any civilian population, including for example reduction into slavery or deportation”.
Or crimes against humanity are “imprescriptible by their nature”as specified in Law No. 64-1326 of December 26, 1964.
The final judgment has not yet been rendered. “The case was put under advisement for three weeks. We will then have an answer on the limitation period”explains the lawyer.
“A feeling of bitterness”
Neither Vivien nor Erpilio are surprised by this first legal response. “It’s a bit of a stir because it’s a fight that I’ve been waging for my grandfather for several yearsconfides the grandson. I have a feeling of bitterness even if I have no illusions. This STO story has been going on for 80 years and I see that France still refuses to assume its responsibilities. These people were never considered. It's as if they never existed, as if they hadn't experienced anything difficult even though they were traumatized.”
For Michel Pautot, not recognizing the deportation of STOs and therefore the imprescriptibility of the facts will “create discrimination in the treatment of these crimes” and they will continue to be the “forgotten by history”. And to conclude: “We must wait for the result and continue to fight for the memory and rights of the victims of the STO”.
