Allard Pierson Museum - University of Amsterdam

(p. 38) In August 2014 the exhibition in Amsterdam came to an end, and 19 of the more than 500 borrowed artifacts were returned to the museum in Kiev, as these were not contested. The objects from the four museums in Crimea, however, remained in Amsterdam due to opposing claims, and the standstill was brought to court in The Netherlands for adjudication. Parties to the court case were the four Crimean museums (hereinafter the “Crimean Museums”), the State of Ukraine and the University of Amsterdam (acting on behalf of the AP Museum). Ultimately, on December 14, 2016, the Amsterdam District Court rendered a decision as to how the AP Museum ought to handle the Crimean loans: they would be returned to Ukraine. In January 2017, that ruling was appealed. While the artifacts remain in storage in Amsterdam pending the outcome of the appeal, this case offers a wealth of political, legal and ethical dilemmas for experts in the field of cultural property disputes. The District Court verdict illustrates the central role of state authorities in the context of international art loans and the 1970 UNESCO Convention.

The Amsterdam Court of Appeal has rendered an interim judgment today.

It has decided as follows:

• The Allard Pierson Museum (APM) is entitled to withhold the Crimean treasures until the matter has been finally decided in court

• The Dutch Heritage Act does not apply in this matter;

• The Court of Appeal needs further information from the parties regarding the ownership claimed by the Ukrainian State and the right of “operational management” claimed by the Crimean museums.

Both the Ukrainian State and the Crimean Museums lay claim to the Crimean Treasures, a collection of artefacts which was lent to the Allard Pierson Museum by the Crimean Museums in 2013. After Crimea separated itself from Ukraine in 2014, it was no longer clear to the Allard Pierson Museum to whom the artefacts should be returned.