FIGHTING AGAINST THE ILLICIT TRAFFICKING OF CULTURAL PROPERTY Cross-border training workshop for relevant authorities of Montenegro and Serbia Rome (Italy), 20-24 November 2017

1. I. INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION:
TOOLS AND RESULTS
IN RESTITUTION ISSUES

2. How?
The 1970 UNESCO Convention and the laws which are subsequent to its
implementation at the national level are useful for the national authorities of State
Parties which would like to return one or several cultural objects to another country.
Successful BILATERAL RESTITUTIONS through
the implementation of the 1970 Convention
(international level)
2

3. US -Turkey,August 2014
 In 2006,Turkish experts noted 16 Roman funerary stelas in the digital catalogue of a US-
based gallery. Scientific research and an examination of criminal records related to the
illicit excavations detected in the source area of the stelas indicated that the stelas were
stolen fromWest Anatolia.
 Following the registration of these stelas in the
INTERPOL Database as stolen, the FBI’s NewYork
Field Office and the Art Crime Unit opened an
investigation and facilitated the return of ten of the
funerary stelas toTurkey in 2014.
3

4. Switzerland – Serbia, June 2014
 Switzerland returned to Serbia a batch of some 150 ancient coins dating back to the Roman Empire.The
majority of the coins are in bronze, and date from the 4th century, and some are Roman coins known as
antoninianii from the 3rd century, and the aces are from the 2nd century.
 This restitution followed their illegal importation into Switzerland by a Serbian resident in 2011.The
coins, illegally excavated and imported from Serbia, were intended for resale in Switzerland on a platform.
This restitution highlighted the fruitful cooperation between Switzerland and Serbia and embodied the
shared commitment of the two countries to protect cultural heritage.
© FOC, Switzerland
4

5. Germany – Iraq, January 2016:
 Germany returned to the Republic of Iraq a Sumerian clay cuneiform tablet on 14 January
2016. It dates from 2049 B.C. and records the distribution of flour to the crew of a ship.
 The tablet was offered in an online auction, in violation of the ban on trade with Iraqi cultural
property in the EU, and seized by a criminal police office in the State of Schleswig-Holstein.
5

6. How?
Actions taken by States Parties to the 1970 Convention to implement its provisions are
crucial for the efficient fight against illicit trafficking of cultural property as well as for the
recovery of stolen objects inside the national borders.
Among the most useful measures to be adopted:
 Development of inventories (museums, cultural or religious monuments, etc.),
 Creation of national specialized services such as police and customs
(or specific training/awareness-raising workshops for general police units and customs
officers),
 Control of exportations,
 Obligation for art dealers to keep and maintain a register
Successful bilateral restitutions through the
implementation of the 1970 Convention
(national level)
6

7. Example with Albania: role of the police
In October 2013, the Albanian police seized more than 1,000 stolen
icons and other religious works of art dating back to the 15th century,
and arrested two men suspected of planning to sell them abroad.
© AFP photo/Gent Shklullaku
The icons, frescoes and
other pieces of art were
stolen from Orthodox
churches in various towns
across southern Albania
and neighboring
Macedonia.
7

8. UNESCO’s historical mandate as facilitator for alternative
resolutions in restitution cases
How?
In case of dispute concerning cultural property between UNESCO Member States, it happens regularly
that one of the countries involved asks for UNESCO’s Secretariat (Headquarters or even through the
field offices) goods offices and particularly calls upon its capacity to act as facilitator when the
negotiations are particularly delicate.
As an Intergovernmental UN Organization,
UNESCO has a clear mandate to act with the
governmental stakeholders.
8

9. EXAMPLE
KHMER STATUES
RETURNED TO CAMBODIA
Ceremony held in Phnom Penh on June 3, 2014
9

10. Khmer statues returned to Cambodia (June 2013)
The opening ceremony of the 37th session of the WHC was
marked by the moving return to Cambodia of two major art
treasures of the 10th century by the President of the New York
MeT (USA). The statues, brought back to Cambodia were
handed over to Prime Minister Samdech Techo Hun Sen, who
stressed the central role of heritage preservation in national
reconstruction and economic development.
© UNESCO/E.Esquivel, 2013
“This restitution is an expression of strong
ethical and moral behaviour that provides
an example of good practice to other
museums and collectors […] UNESCO is
honoured to have contributed to this
restitution, which is, I believe, a move
towards greater respect and mutual
understanding.” (16.07.2013)
Irina Bokova, Director-General until 2017
10

11. Khmer statues returned to Cambodia (May 2014)
 The return of the Duryodhana follows the settlement of
a civil forfeiture action filed by the U.S. Attorney's Office,
which alleged that the statue was stolen from the Prasat
Chen temple at Koh Ker in 1972 by an organized looting
network, and ultimately imported into the United
States and offered for sale by Sotheby's.
 The settlement of this action required the auction house
and the customer selling the Duryodhana to return the
sculpture to the Kingdom of Cambodia.
11

12. II. INTERGOVERNMENTAL COMMITTEE FOR
PROMOTING THE RETURN OF CULTURAL PROPERTY
TO ITS COUNTRIES OF ORIGIN OR ITS RESTITUTION
IN CASE OF ILLICIT APPROPRIATION ( ICPRPC)

13. Mandate will expire in 2019
Mandate will expire in 2017
LITHUANIA
MALI
MONGOLIA
MEXICO
REPUBLIC OF KOREA
ROMANIA
SAUDI ARABIA
SRI LANKA
TURKEY
UNITED REPUBLIC OF
TANZANIA
ZAMBIA
ICPRPC – 22 members
13
AUSTRIA
ARGENTINA
BOLIVIA
(PLURINATIONAL STATE OF)
CHINA
CÔTE D'IVOIRE
EGYPT
GUATEMALA
HUNGARY
IRAQ
ITALY
JAPAN

14. Statutes of the ICPRCP (as amended in 2005), Article 4.1:
« The Committee shall be responsible for:
seeking ways and means of facilitating bilateral negotiations for the restitution
or return of cultural property to its countries of origin […] In this connection, the
Committee may also submit proposals with a view to mediation or conciliation
to the Member States concerned […]. For the exercise of the mediation and
conciliation functions, the Committee may establish appropriate rules of
procedure […] »
Origin
14

15.  Mediation
Means a process whereby an outside party intervene to bring the parties together and to assist
them in reaching an amicable solution of their dispute with respect to the restitution or return of
cultural property
 Conciliation
Means a process whereby the parties concerned submit their dispute with respect to restitution or
return of cultural property to a constituted organ for investigation and for efforts to effect an
amicable settlement of their dispute
2 procedures are available:
15

16. Objective
Facilitate and complement the work of the Intergovernmental
Committee (ICPRCP)
Any request for the return or restitution of cultural property submitted to the
Committee may also be dealt with by a mediation or a conciliation
procedure if the parties to the dispute so agree.
16

17. What kind of cultural property can be requested through the mediation or conciliation
procedure?
As for requests directly submitted to the Committee, the cultural property claimed by a State through the
mediation or conciliation procedure must fulfill 2 conditions:
1.the cultural property must have a fundamental significance from the point of view of the spiritual values
and cultural heritage of the people of the requesting State; and,
1.the cultural property must have been lost as a result of colonial or foreign occupation or as a result of
illicit appropriation.
Material scope (Art.1)
17

18. Who can be the parties in the mediation or conciliation procedure?
As for the procedure submitted before the Committee, only UNESCO Member States and
Associate Members of UNESCO may benefit from a mediation or conciliation procedure
And for institutions and private persons.
If they agree, State may represent the interests of public and private institutions located in their
territory or the interests of their nationals.
Personal scope (Art.4)
18

19. Who can act as mediators and conciliators?
Given the complexity of the subject, only specialists with
expertise in the field of restitution and/or knowledge with
regard to the nature of the dispute or the specificity of the
cultural property at stake, can be selected to act as a
mediator or a conciliator
Mediators and conciliators
What is the role of the mediators and conciliators?
Main role: facilitate just and mutually acceptable solution or settlement of the
dispute, together with the parties concerned
How? They have to be neutral and respectful of the rules of conduct expressly
mentioned as fairness, impartiality and good faith
19

20. Mediators and conciliators
How to identify potential mediators and conciliators?
• In order to help the parties concerned to identify such experts, the Secretariat draws
up and maintains a list of potential mediators and conciliators.
• This list is at the disposal of the parties for their information and possible use.
• The parties do not necessarily need to choose their mediator or conciliator from this
list and are free to appoint any other mediator and conciliator not included in this list
20

21. List of Mediators and conciliators
Composition
To that end, each Member State was
invited to nominate two individuals who
could fulfill the role of mediator or
conciliator in international cultural
property disputes.
As of today 30 countries provided names
of their experts  60 experts are
available
Cultural diversity
Knowledge and experience
of various juridical systems
Different languages
Geographical repartition
21
Advantages

22. Procedure (Art.6)
How to initiate a mediation or a conciliation procedure?
Party Party
consent
UNESCO
Director-General
Information
Chairperson of the
Committee
Committee’s role
Recommend to make use of
the procedure
Secretariat’s role
Offer its good offices
22

23. Written
request
Appointme
nt of the
Mediator(s)
or
Conciliators
Agreement
on the
practical
modalities
Conlusion
Conduct of the procedure (Art.6-11)
23

24.  The Makonde Mask
In May 2010, the Barbier-Mueller
Museum in Geneva agreed for
the restitution of a Makondé Mask to
the United Republic of Tanzania. The
discussions in the framework of the
Committee began in 2006.
Last cases resolved under the aegis of the
ICPRCP
24

25.  The Bogazkoy Sphinx
In May 2011, a bilateral agreement has been
reached between Germany and Turkey on the
Bogazkoy Sphinx.
This case was presented to the Committee in
1987.
Last cases resolved under the aegis of the
ICPRCP
25

26.  Parthenon Sculptures
• Ongoing discussions between Greece and the United Kingdom in respect of the physical
reunification of the Parthenon Sculptures
• Sustains cooperation between the British Museum and the Acropolis Museum
• Request of Greece to use the mediation – conciliation procedure
Pending case before the ICPRCP
26

27.  Code of ethics (UNESCO International Code of Ethics
for Dealers in Cultural Property) (1999)
 Database of National Cultural Heritage Laws (2005)
 Model Export Certificate (UNESCO – WCO) (2007)
 Awareness-raising campaigns (2010)
 Model Provisions on State Ownership on Cultural
Heritage (2011
 Mediation and Conciliation Rules (2011)
Creation of specific tools
27

28. Basic Actions concerning cultural objects
being offered for sale over the Internet
• Developed in cooperation with INTERPOL and the International Council of Museums (ICOM),
• Addresses States that wish to take specific measures to control the online trade in cultural
property
28

29. UNESCO-WCO Model Export-Certificate
for cultural objects
• Cooperation between UNESCO and the World Customs Organization (WCO)
• Specially adapted to the growing phenomenon of cross-border movements of cultural objects
• Usually, the same export form is used for "ordinary" objects (computers, clothes, etc.) as for cultural
objects
• This model fulfils requirements for identifying and tracing cultural objects
• UNESCO and the WCO recommend adopting the model, in its entirety or in part, as the national export
certificate specifically for cultural objects.
Objective: facilitate the work of the States and the customs officials
29

30. Thank you
www.unesco.org/culture/fr/illicittrafficking
Edouard Planche
Section of Movable Heritage and
Museums
convention1970@unesco.org