[CPProt.net] Stolen Antiquities Finders shouldn't be keepers

[Jillian Carman]

Hi Ton

Your mailings are so informative and valuable. Thank you.

I was outraged by the contents of your mailing of 25 November 2005 re the
Cape silver stolen from SA and bought by a Belgian dealer, who says he has
been trying unsuccessfully for ten years to return the pieces to SA. The
facts are that, in Belgian law, purchasers of stolen goods "in good faith"
are entitled to be reimbursed, and the dealer was expecting to be paid a
price that is far in excess of any museum budget in SA, a developing
African country - in fact, in excess of the combined budgets of almost all
our museums. The dealer further complains that the SA museum community
acted in an underhand manner when it appealed to ICOM (International
Council of Museums) in January 1996 for assistance in having the items
repatriated, as the museum could no longer claim on insurance, and did not
have the funds to reimburse the dealer. I believe the SA museum community
sought the only correct and equitable recourse available to it. And this,
I remind you, occurred nearly ten years ago, the period during which the
agrieved dealer claims he has been trying to "return" the items. The
complaint should rather be: what has ICOM been doing about the case?

How can the Belgian authorities - and ICOM and the international community
concerned about dealings in stolen artefacts - morally support a Belgian
dealer's right to compensation for the repatriation of stolen goods, when
there is a case going on in Italy testing the rights of USA finders (read
purchasers) of stolen antiquities not being keepers? (The topic of your
most recent mailing.) If there are investigations into the looting of
central African artefacts under Belgian rule, and these WILL occur, if not
occurring already, how will the Belgian authorities approach repatriation?
Will the Democratic Republic of Congo be expected to pay market-related
prices to compensate dealers and/or museums? Is the case of a more recent
theft of SA cultural items any different from the widespread thefts that
occurred under Belgian and other colonial rules in Africa?

I believe ICOM and the international community need to explain their
inactivity in this particular theft case of Cape silver, and need to
realise that their outrages about first-world thefts should apply equally
to developing-world thefts. Excuses about inactivity from SA during the
trial period of the thief, resulting in the dropping of the case, are not
adequate. The trial occurred when the country was in the midst of a
radical change to democratic government, with upheavals and new
regulations affecting all sectors of society. The future of colonial-era
museums was even in question. A lack of response from authorities may have
been regrettable, but it was surely understandable in the circumstances.

The stolen Cape silver belongs to the people of South Africa. I urge ICOM
and the international community to support a lobby for the return of these
items, at no cost to the South African people.

Dr Jillian Carman
14 Lurgan Road
Parkview
Johannesburg
2193
South Africa
Tel +27 11 646 5039
Mobile 083 227 9843
Fax +27 11 710 6117
jillianc at bellatrix.co.za