Return and restitution of cultural property in the wake of the 1970 Convention

Abstract

Over the past decades illicit trafficking in cultural property has, unfortunately, grown into a problem of epidemic proportions, comparable with the international trade in drugs, with which it shares certain characteristics. Whether or not we succeed in protecting cultural property better in the future depends on wide‐reaching changes in attitudes. A palpable expression of this gradual but certain change in attitude is the adoption of professional codes of ethics by many museums and fine art dealers that reflect a heightened awareness of the implications and problems connected with this illicit traffic. Illicit trafficking in cultural property is an international affair, and only international cooperation, particularly through the adoption of and adherence to international conventions, will allow a higher measure of control in this area. To curb illicit traffic in cultural property more countries must ratify the 1970 UNESCO Convention on the Means of Prohibiting and Preventing the Illicit Import, Export and Transfer of Ownership of Cultural Property, as well as the UNIDROIT Convention of 1995 and other relevant multilateral and bilateral agreements. However, unless these conventions are supported by adequate national legislation and a comprehensive programme for the protection and preservation of cultural heritage, international conventions can have only limited effect. Following the period of decolonization in the 1970s, UNESCO member states recognized that the lack of retrospective application of existing international instruments resulted in many ‘victim’ states that had no legal recourse to claim the return or restitution of illicitly appropriated cultural property.