|
Special Reports |
Why the historic art theft registry that Trans-Art International, L. C. has created is the only international database for stolen works of art that protects the ownership rights of World War II (War) theft victims in their looted property
The Historic Art Theft Registry (Registry) of Trans-Art International, L. C. (Trans-Art) is the only international database for stolen works of art that protects the ownership claims of War theft victims in their missing property without requiring them to pay as a "finder's fee" a material percentage of the value of any item that it locates. The many ways that the Registry benefits art theft victims - at a cost that is no greater than is entailed to Trans-Art in providing these services - has won it the support of several governments and organizations that are committed to protecting their rights.
Recent legal developments in the United States have made clear that War theft victims can preserve their claims to recover their missing art objects, but only if they provide some way for collectors and dealers to identify these items. While courts in the United States - and especially New York - have established legal principles that favor the efforts of art theft victims to reclaim their stolen property, they also have recognized the unfairness that can result when conscientious dealers and collectors take steps to learn whether particular items have been stolen but have been afforded no way of doing so. Courts have declared that in such instances the ownership claims of theft victims who have slept on their rights can be extinguished.
Accordingly, it is imperative that theft victims put the art world on constructive notice of their losses in order to protect their ownership rights in their missing items. And the best way to accomplish this objective is to report losses to an international loss register that collectors and dealers can consult. Art theft victims should appreciate that of the several international databases, publications and information gathering initiatives concerning works of art to which losses can be reported, and which have received significant media attention, only two - the Art Loss Register and the Registry - are designed for this purpose. And only the Registry gives theft victims this opportunity at no greater cost than Trans-Art must expend in providing it.
Several activities in the art world that recently have received international attention do not collect and disseminate information concerning losses of works of art.
For example, the Getty Provenance Database (Database), conducted under the auspices of the Getty Foundation, is compiling information derived form auction records of sales of works of art that occurred in Great Britain during the early 19th century to determine the impact of Napoleonic Wars upon the European art market. The purpose of this initiative is to amplify the provenance of art objects sold during this period. This project eventually will expand the time frame for its inquiries, but does not plan to deal with auction sales that occurred during the 20th century. The Database does not enable 20th century art theft victims to place the international art market on constructive notice of their losses.
The Corbis Publishing (Corbis), controlled by the founder of Microsoft, Bill Gates, recently has introduced a CD-ROM displaying one of the worlds finest collections of impressionist and post-impressionist paintings (the Barnes Collection), which is located near Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. It is attempting to arrange similar licensing agreements with other collections. Corbis, however, does not operate a database for reporting or screening stolen works of art.
Several international publications that do collect information concerning losses of works of art are not designed for collectors to consult. The IFAR Reports is published ten times a year by the International Foundation for Art Research (IFAR) in cooperation with the Art Loss Register, insurance companies, Interpol, the FBI and certain other contributing police organizations. This publication primarily lists thefts that occurred within the last three years and is distributed to auction houses, dealers and police organizations world-wide.
Trace i a monthly publication of Trace Publications, Ltd. that also passes along reports and photographs of recently stolen art objects to the same general sources as IFAR Reports.
Neither IFAR Reports nor Trace is available as a database for collectors and dealers seeking to determine whether particular items of interest have been reported as stolen.
Some criminal enforcement authorities - such as the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and Interpol - compile databases of stolen works of art but do not make these accessible to the public. For example, while losses of works of art can be reported to Interpol, it generally does not disclose this information other than to criminal enforcement authorities. This policy means that if, say, a Belgian museum has reported 5 stolen paintings to Interpol and a United States collector who is considering buying one of these contacts Interpol attempting to determine whether such painting has been reported as stolen, the collector will be told that Interpol does not provide this information unless part of a police inquiry.
The Art Loss Register (ALR) is a publicly available database sponsored primarily by insurance interests which focuses upon losses that were sustained within the past five years. ALR charges $65 per item to register a loss, and also exacts a commission of 10% of the current value of any item that it identifies which the owner ultimately is able to recover. ALR does not help its clients to reclaim their art objects, but rather merely takes this commission as a "finder's fee".
Unlike these initiatives, the Historic Art Theft Registry has been specifically designed to protect the ownership rights of theft victims in their missing art objects by enabling them to put the art world on constructive notice of their losses on the most favorable terms possible.
The Registry has won the support of several prominent governmental and museums officials responsible for War losses because it:
To take advantage of these benefits War theft victims first must investigate, catalogue and record their losses. Trans-Art encourages all theft victims to undertake these steps, as well as to expand regional cooperation, so that they can report their losses to the Registry and protect their ownership rights to the greatest extent that United States law will permit.
Trans-Art can be contacted at 1511 K Street, N.W., Suite 1100, Washington, D. C. 20005. Telephone: (001-202) 737 - 4913, Fax: (001-202) 628 - 0627.
Willi Korte
From January 19th-21st 1995 New York hosted the conference "The Spoils of War - World War II and its aftermath. The loss, reappearance and recovery of cultural property", organized by the Bard Graduate Center for the Decorative Arts, with approximately 70 speakers and guest participants representing more than 15 countries. Some very important and interesting historical information was presented at this symposion, which also provided much information about the present state of affairs in the many countries working on the recovery of art and archives missing since the war. A summary of this last aspect is given below.
Country reports: In Poland, many art losses remain. In 1990, a restitution committee was set up within the Ministry of Culture. There is a Polish-German Good Neighbourhood Treaty of June 1991 and in May 1994 a Polish-Russian agreement was signed. From the Netherlands, more than 6.000 paintings alone are registered as missing. In 1993, a Russian-Dutch working group was established for the Dutch Koenigs collection of old master drawings, of which 307 drawings are now in the Pushkin Museum. They will be exhibited in September 1995. 184 Koenigs drawings are still missing.
Catalogues of the approx. 3300 objects missing from Belgium are being made and distributed. It is known that various Belgian archives are now in Moscow. Since 1981, France has had meetings with Germany on restitutions, recently resulting in the return of 28 paintings from French private collections. The restitution of French archives by the Russian Federation was stopped after ca. 7 loads of material were returned. Documentation on missing art comprises 700 boxes of files.
Russian Deputy Minister of culture Shvydkoy expressed his hope that the present conference might be a first step towards a realistic picture of the art losses. Well known is the disappearance of the Amber Room, but there are more than 700.000 other items lost from Russia. The State Commission for Restitution is currently working on a database of losses. The Deputy Minister referred to the law on restitution now being prepared by the Duma in cooperation with the State Commission and the Ministry of Culture. Russian art historian Rastorguev spoke about trophy art in private hands in Russia today and advocated the return of these objects.
The Ukraine has recently presented Germany with a catalogue of Ukrainian losses. In Belarus, the problem of lost art works (more than 11.000 objects) was actively taken up in 1989. There is a bilateral Belarussian-Russian commission for restitution cases, but this has not yet been effective.
Losses in Austria include tapestries now in St. Petersburg. The Hermitage is prepared to give them back, but bureaucracy has caused delays. In the case of the objects formerly held in the Mauerbach monastery near Vienna (now housed in Schönbrunn), there are approx. 30 claims still to be dealt with, after which the auction of the non-claimed works will take place this year.
In Hungary approximately 40.000 items remain lost. In 1991, a formal request for restitution was presented to the Russian authorities. In 1992 a bilateral working group was established, which held a first meeting in May 1994 in Budapest. An exhibition of the Hungarian treasures in Russia will take place in 1995.
Approx. 5.000 prints and 1700 drawings are missing from Bremen alone. Thousands of objects were returned by the Soviet Union in 1958, mostly from institutions of the former GDR. The Krebs, Siemens and Gerstenberg collections are now on exhibition in the Hermitage Museum, the treasures of Eberswalde and the Troy Gold are in the Pushkin Museum.
Legal issues were covered by M. Kurtz of the US National Archives, who explained that the Allied Control Council (ACC) never reached an agreement on general principles of restitution policy. In the end, unilateral decisions were made by the zone commanders, so there were four restitution programs instead of one unified program. There was no decision made on the ACC level about German cultural property as appropriate for reparations. The concept of restitution in kind was a very limited one. Experts Fiedler (Germany) and Boguslavski (Russia) also covered legal matters. Fiedler referred to the 1969 Vienna treaty on treaty law which governs the German-Russian agreements of 1990 and 1992 and which states "pacta sunt servanda". Article 56 of the 1907 Hague treaty states that cultural objects in public and in private collections are protected from confiscation. Boguslavski said that the russian official position in negotiations with Germany is the view that all cultural property was illegally removed by Germany, but the transports by the Soviet Union from Germany were not all illegal. He stated that restitution in kind was not done under Allied Control Council order but there were other official documents. He also referred to the international norms for restitution, like the Hague Convention of 1954. Deputy Minister Shvydkoy added that Russia continues to implement international treaties including the 1990 and 1992 agreements and that relations with Germany are valued, but that reforms in a country are a slow process.
The last speaker, Lyndel Prott, suggested eight principles for the restitution of cultural property lost during the war, based on existing legal principles like the Hague Convention of 1907, the London Declaration of 1943 and the Hague Convention of 1954 with Protocol.
Josefine Leistra
|
