Thursday, June 13, 2013

Museum of Fine Arts Curator Offers Due Diligence Model, Saying "Ignorance is No Excuse"

The Weary Herakles has long been a poster child for the problems surrounding undocumented antiquities. The Museum of Fine Arts, Boston (MFA) acquired a partial interest in the top half of the statue in 1981 and then a full interest in 2004 under cloudy circumstances. Archaeologists in Turkey excavated the bottom half of the sculpture in 1980. But the dubious provenance surrounding the MFA's top portion of the Weary Herakles is that it belonged to the antiquities dealer's mother, who reluctantly accepted the sculpture from a German art dealer in repayment of a debt. The mother later died, and Iranian officials swiped the documents. Or so the story goes.

The tall tale of the Weary Herakles is retold in Victoria Reed's new article appearing in the DePaul Journal of Art, Technology & Intellectual Property Law (Spring 2013, Vol. 23, No.2). Reed is an expert in provenance investigations. She is the Curator for Provenance at the MFA. Her article titled "Due Diligence, Provenance Research, and the Acquisition Process at the Museum of Fine Arts, Boston" presents an honest look at the MFA's past collecting errors and the institution's current efforts to steer a different course.

The MFA agreed to repatriate the Weary Herakles statue in 2011. "In order to avoid such time-consuming and costly scenarios in our future," Reed argues that "it is necessary for the MFA not to repeat the mistakes of our past." She notes that museums generally "turned a blind eye to gaps in provenance and other red flags, such as the names of known victims and perpetrators of Nazi looting, fanciful ownership histories, or indications of illegal export." They "failed to ask specific questions about the origins of their purchases and gifts." "Today, ignorance is no excuse," Reed plainly writes.

The provenance curator outlines the MFA's current practice of questioning provenance, export, and import information before it acquires or borrows a piece, evaluating not only the information supplied to the museum  but also the source of that information. The article presents a model of due diligence that may help other cultural institutions avoid traps for the unwary.

This post is researched, written, and published on the blog Cultural Heritage Lawyer Rick St. Hilaire at culturalheritagelawyer.blogspot.com. Text copyrighted 2010-2013 by Ricardo A. St. Hilaire, Attorney & Counselor at Law, PLLC. Any unauthorized reproduction or retransmission of this post is prohibited. CONTACT INFORMATION: www.culturalheritagelawyer.com

Tuesday, June 11, 2013

Statues From New York's Met Museum Repatriated to Cambodia


Video source: AFP

This post is researched, written, and published on the blog Cultural Heritage Lawyer Rick St. Hilaire at culturalheritagelawyer.blogspot.com. Text copyrighted 2010-2013 by Ricardo A. St. Hilaire, Attorney & Counselor at Law, PLLC. Any unauthorized reproduction or retransmission of this post is prohibited. CONTACT INFORMATION: www.culturalheritagelawyer.com

Friday, June 7, 2013

Want to Learn More About Cultural Property Law?

Spend a week studying cultural property law with Plymouth State University's summer program. This intensive course will take place from July 15 through 20. The class includes a field trip to the Museum of Fine Arts, Boston.

Plymouth State University
The course examines the international, national, and state legal frameworks for the protection and movement of cultural property. It is taught by this blog author.

Topics for discussion include the 1954 Hague Convention, the 1970 UNESCO Convention, the ICOM Code of Ethics, the National Stolen Property Act, and the Cultural Property Implementation Act. The course also introduces students to important national heritage laws such as the Archaeological Resources Protection Act.

Register by visiting: http://www.plymouth.edu/graduate/academics/course-schedules/summer-2013/ and clicking "Apply Online."  You can find more details about the course by clicking the preceding link and then clicking "Heritage Studies."

This post is researched, written, and published on the blog Cultural Heritage Lawyer Rick St. Hilaire at culturalheritagelawyer.blogspot.com. Text copyrighted 2010-2013 by Ricardo A. St. Hilaire, Attorney & Counselor at Law, PLLC. Any unauthorized reproduction or retransmission of this post is prohibited. CONTACT INFORMATION: www.culturalheritagelawyer.com

Tuesday, June 4, 2013

Black or White? Carved Rhino Horns Sold at Auction, Targeted for Forfeiture


Carved rhinoceros horns sold at auction are now the subject of a federal forfeiture complaint. The U.S. Attorney's office in New Jersey recently filed papers in federal district court claiming that the carved horn cups are legally banned objects subject to seizure and forfeiture.

Prosecutors allege in U.S. v. Two Black Rhinocerso (Diceros Bicornis) Horn Carvings that I.M. Gallery in Beverly Hills, California sold the horns to an overseas buyer for $220,000. They claim the objects are subject to forfeiture under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) and the Lacey Act, which regulate endangered wildlife species possessed, purchased, or offered for sale. The lawyers also argue that the horns are subject to forfeiture as "contrary to law" under 19 U.S.C. § 1595a(d).

The government writes in its May 21st complaint, "The price of libation cups made from rhinoceros horns has increased greatly in recent years." They are highly coveted in a "thriving black market" as rhinos continue to face extinction.

Federal prosecutors allege I.M. Chait Gallery featured the carved horns on the cover of the gallery's catalog for the 2011 Asian and International Fine Arts Auction. The pieces were described as Chinese, “PAIR ANTIQUE CARVED RHINO HORN VESSELS." The gallery claimed that the objects were made from a white rhinoceros, according to the complaint.

U.S. Fish and Wildlife (USFWS) investigated the horns as the shipper prepared the objects for delivery. Export paperwork listing confused information about age ("antique" but "less than 100 years old") and species identification (white rhinoceros) led authorities to test the items. The National Fish and Wildlife Forensics Laboratory "positively identified them as carved from black rhinoceros (Diceros bicornis) horn."

The black rhinoceros is listed among the most protected endangered species in the appendix of the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species. That treaty is implemented in the U.S. by the ESA.

Federal prosecutors explain that "a special agent of the USFWS received a voicemail message from I.M. Chait, who stated, in substance, that he was not certain what species of rhinoceros horn the carvings were made from, [and that] he (Chait) knew they were 200 years old, and therefore considered antique." The government adds to its complaint that "I.M. Chait further stated that since the carvings were antique, the specific rhinoceros species should not matter."

The buyer contacted authorities to explain, "Had I known these are the Black Rhinoceros Carvings, I would never never have risked my hard earned money from my personal savings (over $200,000) to buy them. . . . I would really appreciate if you could return these items to me. However, I am also comfortable to keep these items in US as my personal collection in [the] future in case you and US Customs think they can't be shipped out of US. But to confiscate them will be devastating to my personal finance and my life in general."

Photo credit: mordoc

This post is researched, written, and published on the blog Cultural Heritage Lawyer Rick St. Hilaire at culturalheritagelawyer.blogspot.com. Text copyrighted 2010-2013 by Ricardo A. St. Hilaire, Attorney & Counselor at Law, PLLC. Any unauthorized reproduction or retransmission of this post is prohibited. CONTACT INFORMATION: www.culturalheritagelawyer.com

Tuesday, May 28, 2013

Paleontological Resources Preservation Act Regulations Proposed

Administrative regulations to implement the Paleontological Resources Preservation Act (PRPA) were introduced last week.

PRPA was enacted into law in 2009. It is a federal statute that empowers public authorities to protect paleontological resources on federal lands, providing criminal and civil penalties for fossil theft and vandalism and requiring permits for collecting paleontological resources.

In a public notice dated May 23, 2013, the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) explains "The rule would address the management, collection, and curation of paleontological resources from Federal lands including management using scientific principles and expertise, collecting of resources with and without a permit, curation in an approved repository, maintaining confidentiality of specific locality data, and authorizing penalties for illegal collecting, sale, damaging, or otherwise altering or defacing paleontological resources."

The proposed rule seeks to "clarify that science, rather than other values, will be the primary management tool for paleontological resources on Forest Service lands."

The regulations, if adopted, would require a permit for collecting paleontological resources from Forest Service administered lands.  But those in engaged in the "casual collecting of a rock, mineral, or fossil" would not require a permit.

Written public comments will be accepted on the proposed regulations until July 22, 2013.  They may be submitted by online by visiting www.regulations.gov.

Photo credit: dyet

This post is researched, written, and published on the blog Cultural Heritage Lawyer Rick St. Hilaire at culturalheritagelawyer.blogspot.com. Text copyrighted 2010-2013 by Ricardo A. St. Hilaire, Attorney & Counselor at Law, PLLC. Any unauthorized reproduction or retransmission of this post is prohibited.  CONTACT INFORMATION: www.culturalheritagelawyer.com