Restitution or pillage?

Abstract

ABSTRACTThe recent discovery on 3 May 2016 of 59 Italian paintings in the facilities of the Pushkin Museum is yet another chapter to the unending story of the art displaced as a result of the Second World War.1 Revealed in 1991, the existence of secret deposits of works of art removed from Germany by the Soviet ‘Trophy’ Brigades at the end of Second World War had sparked both amazement and anger. Relief was expressed upon realizing masterpieces the world had thought forever lost had actually been saved; and resentment, for they had been kept hidden for over five decades in the Soviet Union. Germany claims the displaced works of art as its own property, demanding its return. In the meantime, Russia considers the same treasures as compensation for the tremendous destruction inflicted upon Slavic cultural heritage by the Nazis.2 The behaviour of both Russia and Germany has proven to be counterproductive in reaching an effective settlement, but it is usually Germany’s case which has received the most support in Western legal literature. This article, in presenting the legal positions of each claimant, shows the limited capacity of international law in providing a mutually satisfying settlement.