Russian cultural property law
This article has an unclear citation style. (November 2013) |
You can help expand this article with text translated from the corresponding article in Russian. (March 2024) Click [show] for important translation instructions.
|
After the
Background
At the end of the
Debate
Yeltsin in Favour of Restitution 1992
In June 1992, a Decree of the
Duma halts restitution 1994
Starting in 1994, the idea of restitution had completely come to a stop, and the debates started about constructing a law on said cultural valuables.
Duma Proposes Law 1995 and 1996
For six years the debate continued. In January 1995 a large international conference was held in New York City titled "Spoils of War", where the international context about the issues surrounding cultural valuables plundered or misplaced at the end of the Second World War came to light. Firstly, it was important to note that no allied agreement that was made ever stated that works of art or other cultural property could be used for compensation purposes. Efforts such as what was done by the British and the Americans, where they carried out an elaborate program of restitution to countries of origin were discussed. Stories such as the United States had returned over half a million cultural items to the Soviet Union, but Russians were not aware of this, were among many topics discussed.[7] On an international level, legal concepts and precedents existed during the time of the plundering from Germany in 1945, such as the
Yeltsin's Position, July 1996
It was not long after, in early July 1996, the law was passed almost unanimously, making other European counties very hostile about the law. The passage started a slew of diplomatic protests, and as a result the Russian Upper House, the
Duma Passes Law, March 1997
Nevertheless, the law continued to gain support from other nationalist-oriented parties, and the push for the passage of the law continued. The chair of the Duma Committee on Culture, Nikolai Gubenko, continued to stress that the law was a must, on the basis that all the cultural property that was transported to what was the Soviet Union was all done so legally according to allied agreements, and that the law is way of providing justice to the loved ones, nearly 30 million, that are no longer with us due to the horrific outcomes of the war. With more gained support, and a slightly revised law, the Duma again almost unanimously passed the law on 5 February, 1997, and was further passed by the upper house, the Council of Federation on 5 March, 1997.[11]
Yeltsin Vetoes the Law, March 1997
Sticking to what he believed, and despite the ongoing support for the law, President Yeltsin
Constitutional Court ruling
Notwithstanding the President's power to veto the law, the Council of the Federation overrode Yeltsin's veto, with a vote of 141 to 37 in favor of the law on 14 May, 1997. Regardless of the fact that the Council of the Federation overrode Yeltsin's veto, he still refused to sign the law, and further cited allegations of voting irregularities; and repeated his position that the law conflicted Russia's international legal obligations.[13] President Yeltsin was forced to sign the law by the
The law
The Federal Law on Cultural Valuables Displaced to the USSR as a Result of World War II and Located on the Territory of the Russian Federation consists of six Chapters and twenty-five Articles. The Law is aimed at governing cultural valuables displaced to know what is known as Russia. The fundamental goals of the Federal Law are "to protect said valuables from misappropriation and prevent their illegal export beyond the borders of the Russian Federation as well as their unlawful transfer to whomsoever; to establish the necessary legal bases for treating said cultural valuables as partial compensation for the damage caused to the cultural property of the Russian Federation as a result of the plunder and destruction of its cultural valuables by Germany and its war allies during World War II; to protect the interests of the Russian Federation in the settlement of disputed issues with foreign states concerning said cultural valuables through consistent compliance with the principle of mutuality; to provide a possibility for acquainting citizens of the Russian Federation and foreign citizens, including specialists in the fields of education, science and culture, with said cultural valuables; and to create favorable conditions for the continuous development of international cooperation in the fields of education, science and culture".[15]
International criticism
The Law enacted by the Russian Federation on displaced cultural valuables, has been nothing but criticized on an international level. A Hungarian specialist cited a large number of issues on how the Russian law violates international law and treaties.[vague] But more specifically, emphasized that Hungary is entitled to the restitution of Hungarian property removed to the USSR as a result of the Second World War. Further, similar feelings were expressed by a Ukrainian specialist, who argues that Ukraine and other former Soviet republics should have a say in determining the fate of their cultural valuables, on the basis of international norms and democratic principles.[16] A specific criticism of the law is the notion of a limitation period. This is the idea that a claim must be made within 18 months of the information about a specific cultural valuable is published in an appropriate federal agency publication. This strikes a lot of concerns because who decides and what is an adequate publication, and after the 18 months what happens.[17] In 2009, a Ministry of Culture legal specialist wrote that the passage of the law "would appear as a unilateral Russian rejection of its international obligations and evoke a negative impact on international relations of the Russian Federation with various European governments".[18] In June 2013, news reports illustrated that the controversy about the appropriation of German artefacts by the USSR was still on-going between Germany and Russia. During a visit to
References
- ^ Monten, Lina (2004–2005). "Soviet World War II Trophy Art In Present Day Russia: The Events, The Law, and The Current Controversies". Depual J. Art. & Ent. Law. 37.
- S2CID 159710386. Retrieved 21 November 2013.
- S2CID 159710386. Retrieved 21 November 2013.
- S2CID 159710386. Retrieved 21 November 2013.
- S2CID 159710386. Retrieved 21 November 2013.
- S2CID 159710386. Retrieved 21 November 2013.
- S2CID 159710386. Retrieved 21 November 2013.
- S2CID 159710386. Retrieved 21 November 2013.
- S2CID 159710386. Retrieved 21 November 2013.
- S2CID 159710386. Retrieved 21 November 2013.
- S2CID 159710386. Retrieved 21 November 2013.
- S2CID 159710386. Retrieved 21 November 2013.
- S2CID 159710386. Retrieved 21 November 2013.
- S2CID 159710386. Retrieved 21 November 2013.
- ^ "The Documentation Project". Retrieved 21 November 2013.
- S2CID 159710386. Retrieved 21 November 2013.
- S2CID 159710386. Retrieved 21 November 2013.
- S2CID 159710386. Retrieved 21 November 2013.
- ^ "Merkel and Putin view exhibition of disputed art". BBC News. June 21, 2013. Retrieved 21 November 2013.