From “Leader to Pariah”? On the Dutch Restitutions Committee and the inclusion of the public interest in assessing Nazi-spoliated art claims

Tabitha I Oost

doi:10.1017/s0940739121000072

Abstract

AbstractThis article considers the recent and vigorous critique of the Dutch restitution policy on Nazi-looted art in connection with the inclusion of what has been termed the “public interest” in the applicable substantive assessment framework. This assessment framework is entirely based on morally induced policy rules, and it allows the Dutch Restitutions Committee to advise on requests for restitution based on a weighing of interests, including the significance of the work to a museum or public art collection. Although one might question the appropriateness of such interests in a framework designed to remedy historic injustices, it remains to be seen whether this critique is entirely justified. Recent recommendations issued by the Dutch Restitutions Committee indicate that it takes a generous, rather than strict, approach when dealing with requests for restitution. All in all, it seems that both institutional and substantive vulnerability are inevitable if one embarks on a morally induced framework based on mere policy rules rather than legal rules.

Highlights

Ever since the Dutch Restitutions Committee (RC) was established in 2001, the Dutch restitution policy on Nazilooted art has consistently received international praise for its results in dealing with restitution requests.1 Over the past few years, public opinion has begun to change
This article considers the recent and vigorous critique of the Dutch restitution policy on Nazi-looted art in connection with the inclusion of what has been termed the “public interest” in the applicable substantive assessment framework. This assessment framework is entirely based on morally induced policy rules, and it allows the Dutch Restitutions Committee to advise on requests for restitution based on a weighing of interests, including the significance of the work to a museum or public art collection
Recent recommendations issued by the Dutch Restitutions Committee indicate that it takes a generous, rather than strict, approach when dealing with requests for restitution

Summary

Introduction

Ever since the Dutch Restitutions Committee (RC) was established in 2001 (formally known as the Advisory Committee on the Assessment of Restitution Applications for Items of Cultural Value and the Second World War), the Dutch restitution policy on Nazilooted art has consistently received international praise for its results in dealing with restitution requests.1 Over the past few years, (international) public opinion has begun to change.

Results

Conclusion