UNIDROIT Convention on Stolen or Illegally Exported Cultural Objects
 |
|
| Type | Self-executing |
|---|---|
| Signed | June 24, 1995 |
| Location | Rome, Italy |
| Effective | July 1, 1998 |
| Condition | 5 ratifications (Art. 12) |
| Signatories | 22 |
| Parties | 40 |
| Depositary | Italian Government |
| Language | Authoritative in English and French |
UNIDROIT Convention on Stolen or Illegally Exported Cultural Objects (Rome, 1995) is the international treaty on the subject of cultural property protection. It attempts to strengthen the main weaknesses of the 1970 UNESCO Convention on the Means of Prohibiting and Preventing the Illicit Import, Export and Transfer of Ownership of Cultural Property. The UNIDROIT Convention seeks to fight the illicit trafficking of cultural property by modifying the buyer's behaviour, obliging him/her to check the legitimacy of their purchase.
The Convention states that if a cultural property was stolen it must be returned (Chapter II, Art. 3.1). Any possessor deprived of his/her property will be compensated only if he/she can prove due diligence at the time of the purchase (Chapter II, Art. 4.1). The criteria for due diligence is listed under Article 4.4. of the Convention.
To assess the legitimacy of the object's origin, art market players can use international and national databases dedicated to cultural property protection, for instance, the INTERPOL Stolen Works of Art Database collects information about stolen cultural property and issues identification numbers to cultural objects.
Whereas Chapter II of the Convention deals with stolen cultural objects, Chapter III contemplates the export of cultural property in violation of national export restrictions. A State Party can request the competent Court of another Contracting State to order the return of a cultural object illegally exported from its territory if the removal of the object caused detriment in one of the ways listed under Article 5.3. Again, the burden of proof is on the possessor to demonstrate that he/she "neither knew nor ought reasonably to have known at the time of acquisition that the object had been illegally exported" (Art. 6.1).
These rules apply equally to cultural objects inherited or received as gifts. Either an heir or a beneficiary has the same responsibility as a buyer. Therefore, museums and other public institutions must carry out checks over the origin of donated objects.
The UNESCO Convention on the Means of Prohibiting and Preventing the Illicit Import, Export and Transfer of Ownership of Cultural Property (1970 UNESCO Convention) and the UNIDROIT Convention are compatible and complementary. As distinct from the UNESCO Convention, the UNIDROIT Convention focuses on the recovery of cultural property. The UNIDROIT Convention establishes conditions for claims of restitution/return of stolen or illegally exported cultural objects respectively.
Although the UNIDROIT Convention follows key terminology of 1970 UNESCO Convention, cultural goods do not need to be defined as such by the State.
Furthermore, the term “cultural property” is replaced by a more comprehensive “cultural object”, but the list of their categories remains the same. The concept of “illicit export” is replaced by “illegal export”, which references a prohibitive law rather than a general forbiddance.
...
Wikipedia