Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-c47g7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-19T23:36:43.061Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Plunder, Restitution, and International Law

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  17 September 2010

Wayne Sandholtz
Wayne Sandholtz
Affiliation:
Department of Political Science, University of California, Irvine, 3151 Social Science Plaza, Irvine, California 92697-5100. Email: wayne.sandholtz@uci.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The Russian Federal Law on Cultural Valuables Displaced to the USSR as a Result of the Second World War and Located on the Territory of the Russian Federation purports to establish the legal basis for the Russian state to hold permanent title to the vast majority of the cultural valuables removed from Germany to the Soviet Union at the end of World War II. Russia claims that the cultural objects seized by the Soviet Union constitute “compensatory restitution” for the hundreds of thousands of cultural and artistic valuables seized or destroyed by the Nazis during the war. This article assesses the compatibility of the Russian claim with relevant international law. It does so by tracing the development of the international antiplunder legal regime. It then assesses the Russian claim with respect to three categories of cultural valuables, based on prewar ownership: property belonging to private persons and organizations, property belonging to nonenemy states, and property belonging to enemy states (Axis powers). “Compensatory restitution” does not exist as a category or principle in international law, so the analysis focuses on the legal concept that is most similar and therefore of potential relevance, restitution in kind. If restitution in kind is impermissible under international law, then the broader “compensatory restitution” is, with even greater force, also impermissible. The key finding is that international law does not permit “compensatory restitution,” nor does it permit unilateral seizures of cultural objects under some broader notion of compensation.

Type
Articles
Information
International Journal of Cultural Property , Volume 17 , Issue 2: SPECIAL ISSUE: Spoils of War v. Cultural Heritage: The Russian Cultural Property Law in Historical Context , May 2010 , pp. 147 - 176
Copyright
Copyright © International Cultural Property Society 2010

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Agreement Between the Government of the Federal Republic of Germany and the Government of the Russian Federation on Cultural Cooperation. 16 December 1992. Moscow. In The Spoils of War, edited by Simpson, Elizabeth , 306–307. New York: Harry N. Abrams, 1992.Google Scholar
Akinsha, Konstantin . “The Baldin-Bremen Kunsthalle Case.” International Journal of Cultural Property (2010, this issue).Google Scholar
Akinsha, Konstantin . “Stalin's Decrees and Soviet Trophy Brigades: Compensation, Restitution in Kind, or ‘Trophies’ of War?” International Journal of Cultural Property (2010, this issue).Google Scholar
Akinsha, Konstantin, and Grimsted, Patricia Kennedy, trans. “Federal Law on Cultural Valuables Displaced to the USSR as a Result of the Second World War and Located on the Territory of the Russian Federation— No. 64-FZ of 15 April 1998.” International Journal of Cultural Property (2010, this issue).Google Scholar
Akinsha, Konstantin, and Kozlov, Grigorii. Beautiful Loot: The Soviet Plunder of Europe's Art Treasures. New York: Random House, 1995.Google Scholar
Armistice Agreement with Hungary, January 20, 1945. The Avalon Project at Yale Law School. http://avalon.law.yale.edu/wwii/hungary.asp. Accessed 27 April 2010.Google Scholar
Boylan, Patrick J.Review of the Convention for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict. Paris: UNESCO, 1993.Google Scholar
Brownlie, Ian . State Responsibility: Part I. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1983.Google Scholar
Burnett, Philip Mason . Reparation at the Paris Peace Conference from the Standpoint of the American Delegation. New York: Octagon Books, 1965. First published in 1940.Google Scholar
Carducci, Guido . La Restitution Internationale des Biens Culturels et des Objets d'Art Volés ou Illicitement Exportés. Paris: Librairie Générale de Droit et de Jurisprudence, 1997.Google Scholar
Castlereagh (Viscount) . Lord Castlereagh to the Prince Regent. 11 September 1815. The National Archives (United Kingdom; earlier Public Record Office). F.O. 92/26. 111 (TNA pagination).Google Scholar
Castlereagh (Viscount) . Lord Castlereagh to the Prince Regent. “Memoir of Lord Castlereagh.” September 1815. The National Archives (United Kingdom; earlier Public Record Office), F.O. 92/26, no. 50. 117 (TNA pagination).Google Scholar
Childress, James F. “Francis Lieber's Interpretation of the Laws of War: General Orders No. 100 in the Context of his Life and Thought.” American Journal of Jurisprudence 21 (1976): 34–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chorzow Factory . Permanent Court of International Justice, Series A (1928), 29.Google Scholar
Clemen, Paul , ed. Kunstschutz im Kriege. Leipzig: E. A. Seemann, 1919.Google Scholar
Convention (IV) Respecting the Laws and Customs of War on Land, 1907. In The Laws of Armed Conflicts: A Collection of Conventions, Resolutions and Other Documents, edited by Schindler, Dietrich and Toman, Jirí, 57–92. Leiden: A. W. Sijthoff, 1973.Google Scholar
Council on Foreign Relations . The Postwar Settlement of Property Rights. New York: Council on Foreign Relations, 1945.Google Scholar
Decter, Jacqueline . Nicholas Roerich: The Life and Art of a Russian Master. Rochester, VT: Park Street Press, 1989.Google Scholar
De Visscher, Charles . International Protection of Works of Art and Historic Monuments. International Information and Cultural Series, No. 8. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of State, 1949.Google Scholar
Feliciano, Hector . The Lost Museum: The Nazi Conspiracy to Steal the World's Greatest Works of Art. New York: Basic Books, 1997.Google Scholar
Foreign Ministry of Germany [Auswärtiges Amt] . Die völkerrechtswidrige Führung des belgischen Volkskriegs [The Conduct of the Belgian People's War in Violation of International Law]. Berlin: 1915.Google Scholar
Freidel, Frank . Francis Lieber: Nineteenth-Century Liberal. Gloucester, MA: Peter Smith, 1968.Google Scholar
Garner, James W. “Some Questions of International Law in the European War.” American Journal of International Law 9 (1915): 72–112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Garner, James W.International Law and the World War. London: Longmans, Green, 1920.Google Scholar
“General Orders No. 100, Instructions for the Government of the Armies of the United States in the Field.” In The Laws of Armed Conflicts: A Collection of Conventions, Resolutions, and Other Documents, edited by Schindler, Dietrich and Toman, Jirí. Leiden: A. W. Sijthoff, 1973.Google Scholar
Gould, Cecil . Trophy of Conquest: The Musée Napoléon and the Creation of the Louvre. London: Faber and Faber, 1965.Google Scholar
Grimsted, Patricia Kennedy . “Tracing ‘Trophy’ Books in Russia.” Solanus 19 (new series) (2005): 131–45.Google Scholar
Grimsted, Patricia Kennedy . “Legalizing ‘Compensation’ and the Spoils of War: The Russian Law on Displaced Cultural Valuables and the Manipulation of Historical Memory.” International Journal of Cultural Property (2010, this issue).Google Scholar
Grimsted, Patricia Kennedy, Hoogewoud, F. J., and Ketelaar, F. C. J., eds. Returned from Russia: Nazi Archival Plunder in Western Europe and Recent Restitution Issues. Builth Wells, UK: Institute of Art and Law, 2007.Google Scholar
Hague Convention (IV) . Regulations Respecting the Laws and Customs of War on Land. 1907.Google Scholar
Hardenberg (Prince) . “Confidential Note from Prince Hardenberg to Lord Castlereagh.” September 1815. The National Archives (United Kingdom; earlier Public Record Office). F.O. 139/33. 78 (TNA pagination).Google Scholar
Hughes, Robert . “The Spoils of War: Russia's New Displays of Art Looted from Germany Reignite Debate over Who Rightfully Owns Such Plunder.” Time 145 (1995): 64.Google Scholar
Institut de Droit International . Annuaire de l'Institut de Droit International. Brussels: Imprimerie Lesigne, 1928.Google Scholar
Koskenniemi, Martti . “Fragmentation of International Law: Topic (a): The function and scope of the lex specialis rule and the question of ‘self-contained regimes’: An outline.” Unpublished manuscript. International Law Commission, Study Group on Fragmentation. 10 pages. ⟨http://untreaty.un.org/ilc/sessions/55/fragmentation_outline.pdf⟩ (December 2005.) Accessed 28 January 2009.Google Scholar
Kowalski, Wojciech . Art Treasures and War: A Study on the Restitution of Looted Cultural Property, Pursuant to Public International Law. Leicester, UK: Institute of Art and Law, 1998.Google Scholar
Kurtz, Michael J.Nazi Contraband: American Policy on the Return of European Cultural Treasures, 1945–1955. New York: Garland, 1985.Google Scholar
Kurtz, Michael J.America and the Return of Nazi Contraband: The Recovery of Europe's Cultural Treasures. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2006.Google Scholar
Kurtz, Michael J. “The Allied Struggle over Cultural Restitution, 1942–1947.” International Journal of Cultural Property (2010, this issue).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
La Documentation Internationale . La Paix de Versailles, 3. Paris: Les Éditions Internationales, 1930.Google Scholar
La Documentation Internationale . La Paix de Versailles, 4-1. Paris: Les Éditions Internationales, 1932.Google Scholar
La Documentation Internationale . La Paix de Versailles, 4-2. Paris: Les Éditions Internationales, 1932.Google Scholar
Lanzac de Laborie, L. D.Paris sous Napoléon: Spectacles et Musées. Paris: Librairie Plon, 1913.Google Scholar
“The Laws of War on Land.” First published in 1880. In The Laws of Armed Conflicts: A Collection of Conventions, Resolutions and Other Documents, edited by Schindler, Dietrich and Toman, Jirí, 35–48. Leiden: A. W. Sijthoff, 1973.Google Scholar
Lettenhove, H. Kervyn de . La Guerre et les Oeuvres d'Art en Belgique. Brussels and Paris: G. Van Oest et Cie., 1917.Google Scholar
Maggs, Peter . “The Russian Constitutional Court Decisions on the Law on Cultural Valuables—Implications for Private Litigation.” Paper presented at the conference Spoils of War v. Cultural Heritage: The Russian Cultural Property Law in Historical Context, Harvard Law School. February 8–9, 2008.Google Scholar
Marguillier, Auguste . La Destruction des Monuments sur le Front Occidental: Réponse aux Plaidoyers Allemands. Paris and Brussels: G. van Oest & Cie., 1919.Google Scholar
Martens, Georg Friedrich von . Précis du Droit des Gens Moderne de l'Europe, 2 vols., new and revised edition, edited by Vergé, Charles . Paris: Guillaumin et Cie., 1858.Google Scholar
Metternich, Klemens Wenzel von . “Note from Prince Metternich.” 31 August 1815. The National Archives (United Kingdom; earlier Public Record Office). F.O. 139/30. 17 (TNA pagination).Google Scholar
Müffling, Karl von . The Memoirs of Baron von Müffling, A Prussian Officer in the Napoleonic Wars. London: Greenhill Books, 1997. First published in 1844.Google Scholar
Müntz, E. “Les Annexions de Collections d'Art ou de Bibliothèques et Leur Role dans les Relations Internationales, Principalement pendant la Révolution Française (Suite).” Revue d'Histoire Diplomatique 9 (1895): 375–93.Google Scholar
Müntz, E. “Les Annexions de Collections d'Art ou de Bibliothèques et Leur Role dan les Relations Internationales, Principalement pendant la Révolution Française (Fin).” Revue d'Histoire Diplomatique 10 (1896): 481–508.Google Scholar
Nicholas, Lynn H.The Rape of Europa: The Fate of Europe's Treasures in the Third Reich and the Second World War. New York: Vintage Books, 1994.Google Scholar
Petropolous, Jonathan . Art as Politics in the Third Reich. Chapel Hill, NC: University of North Carolina Press, 1996.Google Scholar
Phillipson, Coleman . International Law and the Great War. London: T. Fisher Unwin, 1915.Google Scholar
Posner, Ernst . “Public Records under Military Occupation.” American Historical Review 49 (1944): 213–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
“Project of an International Declaration Concerning the Laws and Customs of War.” First published in 1874. In The Laws of Armed Conflicts: A Collection of Conventions, Resolutions and Other Documents, edited by Schindler, Dietrich and Toman, Jirí, 27–34. Leiden: A. W. Sijthoff, 1973.Google Scholar
Protocol of the Conference: Meeting of 6 September 1815. The National Archives (United Kingdom; earlier Public Record Office). F.O. 139/39. 131 (TNA pagination).Google Scholar
Quynn, Dorothy Mackay . “The Art Confiscations of the Napoleonic Wars.” American Historical Review 50 (1945): 437–60.Google Scholar
Ritter, Waldemar . “The Soviet Spoils Commissions: On the Removal of Works of Art from German Museums and Collections.” International Journal of Cultural Property 7 (1998): 446–55.Google Scholar
Roerich Pact and the Banner of Peace. New York: The Roerich Pact and Banner of Peace Committee, 1947.Google Scholar
Roxan, David, and Wanstall, Ken. The Rape of Art: The Story of Hitler's Plunder of the Great Masterpieces of Europe. New York: Coward-McCann, Inc., 1964.Google Scholar
“Russian Memoir Relative to the Statues, etc.” September 1815. The National Archives (United Kingdom; earlier Public Record Office). CAB 154/1&2. 263 (TNA pagination).Google Scholar
Sandholtz, Wayne . Prohibiting Plunder: How Norms Change. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2007.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sandholtz, Wayne, and Stiles, Kendall. International Norms and Cycles of Change. New York: Oxford University Press, 2008.Google Scholar
Saunier, Charles . Les Conquêtes Artistiques de la Revolution et de L'Empire. Paris: Librairie Renouard, 1902.Google Scholar
Shaw, Malcolm N.International Law, 5th ed.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Simon, Matila . The Battle of the Louvre: The Struggle to Save French Art in World War II. New York: Hawthorne Books, 1971.Google Scholar
Société des Nations (League of Nations). Institut International de Coopération Intellectuelle . Coopération Intellectuelle 85–86: Enquêtes 1938. UNESCO Library, Paris.Google Scholar
Talleyrand-Périgord, Charles de . Talleyrand to Castlereagh. 19 September 1815. République Française. Ministère des Affaires Étrangers. Archives. France et divers états d l'Europe. 20 November 1815. No. 692, Négociations, traités et conventions.Google Scholar
Talleyrand-Périgord, Charles de . Talleyrand to Castlereagh. Mémoires II, 1807–1815. Paris: Librairie Plon, 1957. First published 1807–1815.Google Scholar
Toman, Jirí . The Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict. Aldershot, UK: Dartmouth, 1996.Google Scholar
Treaty between the Federal Republic of Germany and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics on Good-Neighborliness, Partnership and Cooperation, 9 November 1990. International Legal Materials 30 (1991): 504–14. ⟨http://heinonline.org/HOL/Page?collection=journals&handle=hein.journals/intlm30&id=528&size=2&isize=L&rot=0&type=image⟩ Accessed 15 May 2006.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Treaty of Peace between Poland, Russia, and the Ukraine, Signed at Riga, March 18, 1921. ⟨http://www.forost.ungarisches-institut.de/pdf/19210318-1.pdf⟩ Accessed 22 January 2009.Google Scholar
Treaty of Peace with Bulgaria, February 10, 1947. The Avalon Project at Yale Law School. ⟨http://avalon.law.yale.edu/20th_century/usmu012.asp⟩ Accessed 27 April 2010.Google Scholar
Treaty of Peace with Romania, February 10, 1947. The Avalon Project at Yale Law School. ⟨http://avalon.law.yale.edu/20th_century/usmu011.asp⟩ Accessed 27 April 2010.Google Scholar
Treue, Wilhelm . Art Plunder: The Fate of Works of Art in War and Unrest. New York: John Day, 1961.Google Scholar
Union Panamericana . Tratado para la Proteccion de Instituciones Artísticas y Científicas y Monumentos Históricos (Pacto Roerich). Washington, DC: Secretaría General, Organización de los Estados Americanos, 1966.Google Scholar
Wheaton, Henry . Elements of International Law. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1936. First published in 1836.Google Scholar