Washington Declaration

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Washington Declaration ( Washington Principles ) of December 3, 1998 - actually: Principles of the Washington Conference in relation to works of art that were confiscated by the National Socialists - is a legally non-binding agreement on the signatory states to prevent works of art confiscated during the Nazi era Identify looted art , locate its pre-war owners or heirs and find a “just and fair solution”. It was the result of the December 1998 Washington Conference on Holocaust-Era Assets (Washington Conference on Assets from the Time of the Holocaust), in which 44 states, twelve non-governmental organizations, in particular Jewish victims' associations, and the Vatican took part. The US delegation's plan to develop “binding international obligations” was abandoned at an early stage of the preparatory phase. It was a proposal by the Swiss delegation that made it possible to find a consensus at the conference: An express declaration was included in the preamble, which confirms the non-binding nature of the principles, recognizes the differences between the legal systems and takes into account that the individual states in the Act within their own laws.

Germany followed this voluntary commitment with a "Declaration by the Federal Government, the Länder and the municipal umbrella organizations on the discovery and return of cultural property seized as a result of Nazi persecution, especially from Jewish property" on December 9, 1999, as well as a "Guide to Implementing the Washington Declaration" .

Past reparations

As part of the reparation policy, the Federal Republic of Germany had created the legal basis in order to be able to meet legitimate claims for restitution or material compensation for cultural property confiscated as a result of Nazi persecution . If compensation was not possible in individual cases because a legal successor to a Jewish victim could not be found, global payments were made to the Conference on Jewish Material Claims as the representative of the successor organizations. Under civil law, claims have long been statute-barred; According to § 30 of the Federal Restitution Act , claims had to be filed by April 1, 1958 at the latest, in the case of innocent failure of the ridge and reinstatement in the previous state in accordance with § 169 of the Federal Compensation Act at the latest by December 31, 1969.

Irrespective of the lack of a civil law basis, the Federal Republic of Germany, along with 43 other states, has declared that it is ready “to look for cultural property that has been confiscated as a result of Nazi persecution and, if necessary, to take the necessary steps to find a just and fair solution”. In doing so, the true entitled person should be determined; Previously made compensation payments may have to be taken into account.

Handouts for implementation

The public German museums, archives and libraries are supposed to contribute to the discovery of “cultural assets seized as a result of Nazi persecution”. For this purpose, the ownership structure for the period from 1933 to 1945 must be checked. For such provenance research , the “handouts” provide extensive information on characteristics that justify an initial suspicion. The information checked according to the “four-eyes principle” is to be passed on to the coordination office for the loss of cultural property and published on its Internet website “LostArt.de”. Search requests from abroad must also be entered at this address.

No legally binding set of rules is specified for the "examination of the persecution-related withdrawal" and the handling of the return procedure: Claims are no longer enforceable through legal channels. The handouts are therefore limited to “suggestions” and leave this “within the framework of the applicable budgetary provisions” to the discretion of the institution concerned or its provider. According to the proposed test grid, the presumption of a persecution-related withdrawal is always considered to be refuted if a reasonable purchase price has been paid and the seller was able to freely dispose of the amount or transfer it abroad.

If a claim is recognized, there are other possible solutions in addition to the return of the art object to the owner, such as buyback, permanent loan agreement or exchange. If the work of art remains in the exhibition, references to the provenance and fate of the former owners should be included.

Arbitration Board

If a mutual agreement on the restitution of a work of art is pending, it is possible to call an agency via the “Coordination Office for the Loss of Cultural Property”. The “Advisory Commission for the Return of Cultural Property Stolen by National Socialist Persecution”, known to the public as the Limbach Commission , only makes a legally non-binding recommendation.

Restitutions

Within the first five years up to mid-2005, more than 150 institutions identified more than 3,500 cultural objects, for which withdrawal due to Nazi persecution cannot be ruled out. Over 160 paintings, drawings and graphics and more than 1,000 books were identified and returned to the authorized persons.

On the occasion of the restitution of the painting “ Berlin Street Scene ” by Ernst Ludwig Kirchner , which was exhibited in the Berliner Brücke-Museum until July 2006 , there were extremely critical reactions and controversial discussions. They highlight the existing legal uncertainty that the legally non-binding but morally binding principles of the Washington Declaration can trigger.

Due to the statute of limitations laid down in the Civil Code, private collectors are not legally obliged to return a work of art that has been confiscated from the Jewish owner as a result of persecution. In recent years, some projects aimed at excluding the statute of limitations in certain cases have failed.

literature

  • Inka Bertz, Michael Dorrmann: Robbery and Restitution - Cultural Property from Jewish Ownership from 1933 to Today. Wallstein Verlag, Göttingen 2008, ISBN 978-38353-0361-4
  • Andrea Raschèr : The Washington Conference on Holocaust-Era Assets (November 30 - December 3, 1998) in: International Journal of Cultural Property (IJCP) 1999, p. 338.
  • Andrea Raschèr : Washington looted art - guidelines - origin, content and application. In: KUR - Art and Law , Volume 11, Issue 3–4 (2009), p. 75. doi : 10.15542 / KUR / 2009 / 3-4 / 2

Web links

Individual evidence

  1. ↑ Katja Lubina: Contested cultural property - The return of nazi spoliated art and human remains from public collections , Maastricht 2009, p. 177 fn. 820
  2. ↑ Declaration by the Federal Government on the discovery and return of cultural property confiscated as a result of Nazi persecution, in particular from Jewish property.
  3. ↑ For the texts of the three documents see web links
  4. ^ Declaration by the Federal Government of December 9, 1999
  5. ↑ Handouts for implementation, p. 20
  6. ^ Appeal to search for cultural assets seized as a result of Nazi persecution in German institutions. (January 2005)
  7. ↑ Inca Bertz, Michael Dorrmann: Looting and Restitution , Goettingen 2008, ISBN 978-38353-0361-4 , p.6
  8. ^ Hans-Ulrich Dillmann: More legal security. September 12, 2018, accessed June 24, 2019 .
  9. ↑ Bundesrat Drucksache 2/14: Draft of a law to exclude the statute of limitations of claims for surrender in the case of lost items, especially in the case of cultural property confiscated during the Nazi era (Cultural Property Return Law - KRG) . January 7, 2014 ( bundesrat.de [PDF; accessed June 24, 2019]).