the judgment of the District court of Amsterdam, to give the famous Scythian gold Ukraine, not Crimea is a dangerous precedent. So consider the Russian Museum. And it can undermine the free world practice of Museum exchanges: all values are always returned in the same Museum, from which profit. And in international law, no reservations on the subject of what to do if the Museum during an outdoor exhibition moved to another state. In Amsterdam tried to add unauthorized international rules. Possible judicial review and how it responded in Crimea?
No argument this time was gone, all the words have been said. The judge calmly read out the verdict.
“treasures of the Crimean museums need to return to Ukraine, because in accordance with the agreement adopted by UNESCO in 1970, the Museum values belong to a sovereign state, from which they were removed. Crimea is not a sovereign state, and he wasn’t at the time of signing the agreement on the sending of exhibits to the exhibition in the Netherlands, and mean the exhibits should be returned to Ukraine”, — said the judge Dudek van hill.
But the main question about who belongs to historical values — to Kiev or the Crimea — the judge did not answer. Dutch washed his hands and shifted the responsibility to the Ukrainian court to decide in a case of receiving the complaint should he, based on its laws. And while Kiev is obliged to pay the Dutch Museum Alarda Pearson’s 111 thousand euros plus the rent for the storage, packing and regular inspection of antiquities. No money, but Kiev is in a hurry to pick up the collection.
“we Have no access to Crimea, we can’t protect our cultural heritage in the Crimea. That’s why we decided to transfer the right to dispose of the exhibits to another Museum — the national Museum of Ukraine. As soon as Crimea is de-occupy, all the cultural heritage of coming back, of course, in the Crimea”, — said the first Deputy Minister of culture of Ukraine Svetlana Fomenko.
two years of litigation, the Ukrainian side is scared of the judges human rights violations in the Crimea, a Peninsula pumping arms and infringement of the rights of Tatars. The political context, according to experts, was on the Ukrainian side. But the logic of international law on the side of the Crimeans. Once the collection was given to the Museum, where she need to return.
“the Court was delivered in very difficult conditions, given the possible pressure exerted. How long it will last? I think that the Crimean museums will fight to the last. And even when it would seem that all is already lost, we’re still going to fight,” — says the curator of the exhibition Valentina Mordvintseva Europe.
the decision of the district court of Amsterdam in the gold of the Scythians is not final, it can be challenged in the near future representatives of the Crimean museums will appeal.
Instead of the unique artifacts of the Sarmatian-Alanian burial ground — the void. Black on white “exhibit in Amsterdam”. And it’s Central location in one of the showcases of the Museum of Tauris. Such tablets there are dozens. Despite the decision of the Dutch court, still waiting for the return of the collection. That the exhibits were again in their places.
Crimean collection of Scythian gold in a Dutch Museum Alarda Pearson was brought back in 2014. Strange artifacts — more than five hundred exhibits a total value of over one million euros — was so pleased European audience that the exhibition even extended several times. But when it came time to return the exhibits to the museums of the Peninsula, the official Kiev has declared the entire collection of state property of Ukraine, and by the court in absentia arrested the exhibits. In response, four of the Crimean Museum has sent a lawsuit in Dutch court. However, precedents for such disputes in the Museum world has ever had.
“All of this will complicate the further cooperation of the Museum. This verdict at all, in my opinion, create a new situation for museums, as it deprives the right of museums to be the custodians of those collections that they contain. Now the verdict is in favor of the state and, in fact, it opens the possibility that the state in any situation convenient for yourself, will be able to withdraw some items, so to speak, to move them, and so on”, — the Director of the Central Museum of Tauris Andrei Malygin.
experience the world of practice, a collection is always returned to the Museum, where she came from. In addition, the agreement to hold the exhibition in Amsterdam was directly between the Dutch Museum Alarda Pearson and museums of the Peninsula. In the framework of the legal agreement, the collection should be returned to the Peninsula.
“We have entrusted civilized Europe, enlightened Europe best items to ensure that they learned the Crimea. And moreover, according to the owner, we shook hands only with the Director of the Museum of Alard Persona. And was signed by each Director with him. And so I believe this is the lost reputation and the image of the Museum Alarda Persona”, — said General Director of the East Crimean historical and cultural Museum-reserve Tatiana umrikhina.
“the decision of the court of Amsterdam is not a judicial decision, it is a political act, which is far from the concepts of justice, fairness, legality and impartiality of the court when making decisions,” says state Duma Deputy, ex-Prosecutor of the Crimea Natalia Polonskaya.
the Identity of the collection of Scythian gold of the Crimean museums proves the special marking on the exhibits. Therefore, the transfer of the artifacts to a third party, Ukraine, which, incidentally, did not even figure in the agreement was a flagrant violation of international rules of the Museum’s cooperation.
“Unique items from the collection of Scythian gold was found on the Peninsula, the Crimean archaeologists and are part of the cultural heritage of this region”, — said the lawyer of the Collegium of advocates Inyurkollegiya Anastasia Sivickaja.
This is one of the main arguments in the struggle for the return of the exhibits. The Museum of the Peninsula are already preparing to appeal the decision of the Dutch court. The Russian side still has three months to appeal.