ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON THE ASSESSMENT OF RESTITUTION APPLICATIONS FOR ITEMS OF CULTURAL VALUE AND THE SECOND WORLD WAR Report 2012 ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON THE ASSESSMENT OF RESTITUTION APPLICATIONS FOR ITEMS OF CULTURAL VALUE AND THE SECOND WORLD WAR Report 2012 Visiting address: Lange Voorhout 13 Postal address: P.O. Box 556 2501 CN The Hague, The Netherlands tel: +31 (0)70 376 5992 e-mail: [email protected] internet: www.restitutiecommissie.nl/en Cover illustration: Man with high cap by Ferdinand Bol (NK 1668) List of contents Foreword 5 1. Introduction 7 2. The Restitutions Committee 8 2.1 History in brief 8 2.2 Members and employees of the Restitutions Committee 9 2.3 The work of the Restitutions Committee: introduction 11 2.4 Change to the more liberal restitutions policy and amendment of the Decree Establishing the Restitutions Committee 12 2.5 Requests for revised advice 18 3. A look back at 2012 19 3.1 The Katz recommendation 19 3.2 Symposia and study days 21 3.3 26 and 27 November 2012: ‘Fair and Just Solutions?’ 23 4. Restitutions Committee recommendations 32 4.1 2002 - 2012 overview 32 4.2 Revised recommendations 34 4.3 Binding opinions 34 4.4 Status at the end of 2012 35 5. Conclusion 36 6. Recommendations issued in 2012 37 Appendices 90 3 Foreword The Restitutions Committee marked its tenth anniversary in 2012, but the problems it exists to deal with have been around for sixty-seven years. This meant there was no justification to celebrate, but there was reason to pause and reflect at an international level on the restitution policy’s reason for existence, application and developments. The Carnegie Foundation also recognized the importance of this, which is why the Committee was able to organize a meeting on 26 November in the apposite surroundings of the Peace Palace in The Hague with the advisory committees of Germany, France, Austria and the United Kingdom, and the Special Envoy for Holocaust Issues of the United States, and then hold a symposium on 27 November. The subjects discussed at the symposium are described in this annual report in anticipation of a separate publication about them. The subject of the symposium—Fair and just solutions? Alternatives to litigation in Nazi- looted art disputes, status quo and new developments—dovetailed with the Washington Principles. When considering the advent and assessment of new developments, it is always important to bear in mind the basic starting points as laid down in these Principles. This maintains the vitality of the common foundations for resolving restitution issues, and the international context is one of the characteristics. Justice can also be done to particular national circumstances within that framework. The place where restitution acquires substance can thus have an effect on the way in which a special case is assessed. International collaboration in the further study and elaboration of this idea will promote the character of just and fair. These concepts also played a distinct role in the developments in 2012 at a Dutch national level. In a decree dated 4 July 2012, the State Secretary for Education, Culture and Science Disclaimer changed the Committee’s terms of reference. From now on the assessment of claims to works of art in the Dutch National Art Collection that are not in the Netherlands Art Property This English version is a translation of the original Dutch report ‘Verslag 2012’, Collection (NK collection)—in other words works that were not obtained in the years in case of possible differences in translation we refer you to the Dutch report. immediately after the war as a result of recovery by the allied armies—will be conducted according to the yardsticks of fairness and justice, and no longer in accordance with the rules designed by the Ekkart Committee, under which the interests of the current owner may not be considered. In his letter of 22 June to the Lower House of the States General, the State Secretary advised that the same will apply to the evaluation of claims to works from the Frequently used abbreviations: NK collection with effect from mid-2015. After this, therefore, all claims will be appraised according to these yardsticks. The starting points taken into account by the Ekkart BHG Origins Unknown Agency Committee can and will continue to influence what is to be considered as fair and just. Council Council for Culture NA National Archives of the Netherlands So the passage of time is also important to the way claims should be evaluated. Specific NBI Netherlands Property Administration Institute circumstances of place and time will continue to contribute to implementing the restitution NIOD Netherlands Institute for War, Holocaust and Genocide Studies policy on one common national and international basis. NK-collection Netherlands Art Property Collection OCW Education, Culture and Science RCE Cultural Heritage Agency RKD Netherlands Institute for Art History W.J.M. Davids SNK Netherlands Art Property Foundation Chairman 4 5 1. Introduction This is the eleventh annual report of the Advisory Committee on the Assessment of Restitution Applications for Items of Cultural Value and the Second World War (the Restitutions Committee). The Restitutions Committee was established over ten years ago by the State Secretary for Education, Culture and Science (OCW) through a decree dated 16 November 2001, and it gives its opinion about applications for the restitution of Nazi looted art.1 This annual report should be seen as a follow-up to annual reports published previously, which describe the Restitutions Committee’s history, policy framework and working methods. Readers seeking more detailed information about these subjects are referred to those earlier publications.2 This report concentrates on the activities carried out in 2012. Chapter 2 contains a brief description of the Restitutions Committee’s history and an introduction to its members and employees. This is followed by an overview of the Committee’s advisory tasks and the relevant policy framework, some parts of which were changed by the Dutch government in 2012. Chapter 3 addresses the year under review—2012—with an account of the activities carried out. There is also a summary of the proceedings of the international symposium Fair and Just Solutions? Alternatives to litigation in Nazi-looted art disputes, status quo and new developments, which was held on 27 November 2012. The Committee organized this event to mark its tenth anniversary. This section anticipates the publication of the symposium’s proceedings in English in 2013/2014. A numerical overview of the recommendations issued from 2002 to 2012 inclusive is presented in chapter 4. After the conclusion in chapter 5, this annual report ends with the full text of all the recommendations that the Committee issued in 2012. 1 ‘Decree Establishing the Advisory Committee on the Assessment of Restitution Applications for Items of Cultural Value and the Second World War’, 16 November 2001. The Decree establishing the Restitutions Committee was amended by the State Secretary of OCW through a decree of 4 July 2012. Appendix 1 contains the 2001 Decree establishing the Restitutions Committee and the associated explanatory notes. The entire amended text of the Decree establishing the Restitutions Committee, which came into effect on 19 July 1. Exhibition of recovered art in the Rijksmuseum, Amsterdam, April-June 1950. 2012, can be found in Appendix 2. See section 2.4 for more information about the amendment of the Decree establishing the Restitutions Committee. 2 A detailed description of the history and policy framework of the Restitutions Committee is given in the 2002 and 2005 annual reports. The 2011 annual report addresses the Committee’s working practices. All annual reports can be consulted in digital form on the website http://www.restitutiecommissie.nl (Dutch version) or http://www.restitutiecommissie.nl/en (English version). Please contact the office of the Restitutions Committee (the address can be found at the end of this report) to request printed copies of the annual report. 6 7 2. The Restitutions Committee Starting at the end of nineteen-nineties, renewed interest arose in the Netherlands and other countries in the return of art treasures that had been stolen during the Second World War. There were calls for a flexible restitutions policy, for example in 2.1 History in brief such international instruments as the Washington Principles on Nazi Confiscated Art (1998) and in a resolution on Looted Jewish Cultural Property (1999) adopted by the During the Second World War the Nazis seized, stole or purchased art from private Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe. Recommendations were made to opt individuals and art galleries on a large scale. After the liberation the allies found many for a form of alternative dispute settlement outside the standard judicial process. The of these items of cultural value, particularly in Germany, after which they were brought actions taken in the Netherlands in response to these principles included establishing the back to their country of origin. This recovery was accompanied by the instruction to Advisory Committee on the Assessment of Restitution Applications for Items of Cultural national governments to manage the art being returned and to ensure it was restored Value and the Second World War (Restitutions Committee) in a decree dated 16 November to the rightful owners or their heirs. In the Netherlands, the Netherlands Art Property 2001. The Origins Unknown Committee, also known as the Ekkart Committee, played Foundation (SNK) was tasked with the recovery and restitution activities. Some of the an important role in its history.3 Under the supervision of this committee, between 1997 items of cultural value that were not restituted after the war were auctioned off by the and 2004 the Origins Unknown Agency (BHG) investigated the provenance of all items Dutch State during the nineteen-fifties.