Chapter 9 Situation in various other European States
“Art works are now being used as hostages in trading disputes.” 1
Th e number of European States with immunity from seizure legislation is slowly growing, although the majority of States does not have such legislation (yet). As the country reports of the United Kingdom and the Netherlands have been dealt with in separate chapters, infra an overview can be found of the situation in France, Ger- many, Austria, Belgium, Switzerland, Liechtenstein, Finland and the Czech Repub- lic. Th e States are put in chronological order (date of legislation). Th is is followed by those States which are considering enacting legislation in the foreseeable future, and by considerations of several other Member States of the European Union concern- ing immunity from seizure legislation, including those States which do not see any merit in this. Th e chapter will be concluded with some words regarding the situation in the Russian Federation. I will not only pay attention to the possible legislation of the State concerned and the way leading to that legislation, but also to the question whether that State is of the opinion that a rule of customary international law exists, holding that cultural objects belonging to foreign States and on temporary loan are immune from seizure.
Mikhail Piotrovsky, the Director of the State Hermitage Museum St. Petersburg, Rus- sian Federation, in , in reaction to the Swiss Noga case. 282 Chapter 9
9.1 France
9.1.1 The Shchukin case2 In 1993, a French citizen, Irina Sergeevna Shchukina, who was the daughter of Sergei Shchukin,3 fi led suit against three Russian museums:4 the State Museum of Fine Arts (Pushkin Museum) in Moscow, the State Hermitage Museum in St. Petersburg and the National Centre of Arts and Culture George Pompidou in Paris. Th e case was adjudicated by the Tribunal de Grande Instance in Paris.5 Th e Pompidou Centre borrowed for an exhibition, called Henri Matisse 1904-1917 which lasted from 25 February till 21 June 1993, a total of 130 objects, 21 of which were works of art by the French artist Henri Matisse,6 from the Pushkin Museum and the
Stchoukine v. Le Centre National d’Art et de Culture Georges Pompidou, the Hermit- age Museum St. Petersburg, the Pushkin Museum Moscow and the Russian Federation, Tribunal de Grande Instance Paris, ère Ch., ère Section, June , No. /, upheld on appeal by the Paris Court of Appeal. Th e judgment has not been published, but is on fi le with the author. See also: Mark M. Boguslavskij, ‘Irina Shchukina’s Suit (On the Decision of a French Court)’, International Journal of Cultural Property, , Vol. , Issue , pp. -. See also: Ruth Redmond-Cooper, ‘Disputed title to loaned works of art: the Shchukin litigation’, Art Antiquity and Law, February , Vol. I, Issue , pp. -. Repr. in: Norman Palmer, Art Loans, London, Th e Hague, Boston , Appendix IX. See also: Alexander Kaplan, ‘Th e need for statutory protection from seizure for art exhibitions: the Egon Schiele seizures and the implications for major museums exhibi- tions’, Journal of Law & Policy, , Vol. , pp. -, at pp. -. See supra, Ch. ., n. . Just before the suit was brought before the court, Irina Shchukina wrote a letter to the then President Boris Jeltsin, in which she agreed that her father’s collection should stay in Russia. However, she insisted that Russia would repeal the ‘criminal’ nationalisation decree as a precondition for the Shchukin family handing over the collection. She did not receive any reply from Jeltsin. See: Tatyana Andriasova, ‘Shchukin’s unique art col- lection returns to Russia’, Th e Moscow News, October , to be found at: http:// www.gif.ru/eng/news/art-collection-returns. [Last visited March .] See also: Leila Anglade, ‘Anti-Seizure Statutes in Art Law: the infl uence of “La Danse” on French Law’, in: Oonagh Breen, James Casey and Anthony Kerr (eds.), Liber Memorialis Profes- sor James C. Brady, Dublin , pp. -, p. . In , the Soviet authorities allowed paintings of Picasso forming part of the Sh- chukin collection to be displayed at the House of French Th ought in Paris. Ekaterina Shchukina, the eldest daughter of Sergei Shchukin (and elderly sister of Irina) fi led a suit to have it impounded. Th e exhibition was immediately closed and the paintings taken to the Russian Embassy in Paris. Her claim was rejected by the French Court by verdict of July , as the nationalisation in the Russian Federation could not be considered as contrary to the French public order or in violation of French law, and the collection returned to Moscow. So, now another attempt was made. See: http://www.morozov- shchukin.com/html/dossier_presse_ang.html. See also: ibid. (Anglade), at p. . Henri Matisse ( December - November ) was a French artist. When he painted Th e Dance for Shchukin, he was called a Fauve, which means ‘wild beast’. Fau-