Tuesday, April 15, 2014

Egypt Officially Asks U.S. for MoU to Protect Cultural Heritage

The Cultural Property Advisory Committee (CPAC) is scheduled to take up Egypt's formal request to have American import protections placed on endangered archaeological material originating from that country. The Federal Register today pre-published a notice announcing that CPAC will begin a review of Egypt's proposed Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) on June 2.

Temple of Isis at Philae in Egypt.
CHL has been calling for greater protection of archaeological sites, religious structures, and monuments since 2011 because of increasing perils to cultural heritage in Egypt. These threats have been chronicled in several CHL blog posts including here and here.

The International Council of Museums itself alerted the world to this swelling problem in 2012 by publishing the Emergency Red List of Egyptian Cultural Objects at Risk.

To submit comments concerning the proposed MoU, go to the Federal eRulemaking Portal and enter Docket No. DOS-2014-0008. Comments must be sent to CPAC by May 14. They must relate to the "four determinations" laid out by the Convention on Cultural Property Implementation Act (CPIA). These include:
(A) [whether] the cultural patrimony of the State Party is in jeopardy from the pillage of archaeological or ethnological materials of the State Party; 
(B) [whether] the State Party has taken measures consistent with the Convention to protect its cultural patrimony; 
(C) [whether] --(i) the application of the import restrictions . . . with respect to archaeological or ethnological material of the State Party, if applied in concert with similar restrictions implemented, or to be implemented within a reasonable period of time, by those nations (whether or not State Parties [to the 1970 UNESCO Convention]) individually having a significant import trade in such material, would be of substantial benefit in deterring a serious situation of pillage, and (ii) remedies less drastic than the application of the restrictions set forth in such section are not available; and 
(D) [whether] the application of the import restrictions . . . in the particular circumstances is consistent with the general interest of the international community in the interchange of cultural property among nations for scientific, cultural, and educational purposes.
Photo credit: Martyn E. Jones

By Rick St. Hilaire Text copyrighted 2010-2014 by Ricardo A. St. Hilaire, Attorney & Counselor at Law, PLLC. Blog url: culturalheritagelawyer.blogspot.com. Any unauthorized reproduction or retransmission of this post is prohibited. CONTACT INFORMATION: www.culturalheritagelawyer.com

Monday, April 14, 2014

True Grit: Monica Hanna Defends Heritage in Egypt, Receives SAFE's Prize

(C) SAFE. Used with permission.
Khaemwaset was a royal prince who lived during the 13th century B.C. He became the first Egyptologist and was greatly revered in his time for conserving Egypt's monuments.

Now a 21st century Egyptologist has been honored for preserving the past. She is archaeologist Dr. Monica Hanna, who actively searches the desert sands and the Nile banks to defend Egypt's rich heritage against looters and vandals.

Saving Antiquities for Everyone (SAFE) presented the Beacon Award to Dr. Hanna Thursday night, calling her "an outstanding archaeologist and social media advocate whose work has raised public awareness about the illicit antiquities trade and the fight to protect cultural heritage." SAFE's distinguished prize has been presented since 2006 to recognize individuals who bring attention to the global crime of heritage trafficking.

Dr. Hanna has replaced Khaemwaset's chariot, papyrus roll, and royal title with a car, a Twitter account, and true grit. She uses modern-day tools along with old-fashioned courage to travel to heritage sites under attack and tweet for help. Dr. Hanna now has close to 30,000 followers on Twitter's social networking site. The internet-savvy archaeologist also the founded the online community known as Egypt’s Heritage Task Force

Prior to receiving the Beacon Award, Dr. Hanna addressed an auditorium of engaged listeners about "Saving Ancient Egypt, One Tweet at a Time." She passionately described the destruction affecting Egypt's heritage since the Arab Spring, and her photographs of armed looters and dynamited sites belied the fact that her daily work remains fraught with danger as she confront criminals, government officials, and civil unrest. She has even been shot at.

Dr. Hanna's determination has paid off, nevertheless. With modesty and enthusiasm, the Egyptologist explained how she rallied her countrymen to clear trash from an archaeological site, inspired local protests against unplanned urban expansion, and gathered help to clean up the mess left behind by thieves and vandals who stole practically everything from the Malawi museum and burning and destroying whatever they could not haul off.

Those in attendance at last week's ceremony in New York learned about three significant perils to cultural heritage in Egypt as Dr. Hanna recited many incidents of looting, land grabbing, and smuggling that have occurred since 2011.

Dr. Monica Hanna's slide showing a large looter's pit
near the Black Pyramid at Dashur, Egypt.
Explaining that there is "looting with machine guns," the archaeologist described plundering that has taken place at Abusir, Dashur, Memphis, and several other historic locations throughout the country.

Dr. Hanna chronicled artifact thefts near the Black Pyramid, facilitated by diggers who greatly expanded the number of illegal looter's pits during the first 30 days after the revolution.

The area of Dashur--a royal necropolis that is home to the Black Pyramid, the Red Pyramid, the Bent Pyramid, and many other important monuments--witnessed an astounding 300% increase in thieves' holes. Dr. Hanna presented satellite images of the pockmarked landscape, which has swelled across the archaeologically rich desert in recent years.

The Egyptologist lamented about the destruction caused by bulldozers that "rummage like cats in a trash bin," irretrievably shredding archaeological material. Blasting too has wiped out evidence of the past, documented by photographs depicting the devastating aftermath caused by freshly exploded dynamite.

Dr. Hanna pointed out the differences between the "organized mafia" and the local villagers who steal antiquities. Organized criminals use four wheel drive vehicles, bulldozers, and weapons smuggled from Libya. They hire locals to dig and give them lunch boxes. More importantly, they often target specific objects of interest like those from the Amarna period, the New Kingdom, and the Old Kingdom. The looting demonstrates that "they have archaeological knowledge," Dr. Hanna warily observed. Local villagers and families, by contrast, use simple rope and shovels.

Decrying unplanned urban expansion, Dr. Hanna described this growing harm with slides depicting a new parking lot built over an old temple site and a soccer field pitched atop an ancient 26th Dynasty burial. Land grabbers and the "land mafia," meanwhile, have wrested control of heritage locations by "hacking out" traces of archaeology and by building modern cemeteries to claim dominion, she said.

Dr. Hanna spoke about "clear channels for smuggling" that menace the country as Egypt continues to be stripped of artifacts that are illegally sold abroad. Antiquities trafficked from the Sinai Peninsula to Gaza eventually fly from Israel to European markets, the Egyptologist disclosed. Artifacts also find their way from the Gulf of Suez seaport of Ein El Sokhna to Dubai, Doha, and other destinations.

Amid the descriptions of endangered cultural heritage, Dr. Hanna expressed concern for the welfare and education of the children of Egypt. Illegal digging, for example, has caused deaths. At Abusir el-Malaq, a site where thieves have created heaps of human bones and fragmented mummies, Dr. Hanna gave an account of how approximately 20 children were killed while unearthing artifacts.

She highlighted that Egypt's children would not have a vested interest in protecting local culture if they failed to embrace the heritage as their own. One teenage boy, whom Dr. Hanna spotted running away from the ransacked Malawi museum, told her it was okay to attack the artifacts because the museum belonged to the government. She implored that a "mistake we need to address is that belief that heritage belongs to the government and not to the people." Dr. Hanna expressed appreciation to the other young people who arrived to help save what was left of the Malawi museum's collection.

Dr. Hanna concluded her remarks to the SAFE audience by offering several suggestions about how Americans could help. She encouraged support for academics who publish scholarly articles documenting archaeological site looting. She emphasized that the illegal sale of artifacts must be reported to authorities. She also expressed strong support for the adoption of import barriers to block pillaged and smuggled Egyptian artifacts from entering the United States.

There will be more heritage to protect as the resilient Dr. Hanna returns home to Egypt. To track her ongoing preservation efforts and to learn more about cultural heritage under threat, readers can follow the modern-day Khaemwaset's Twitter feed here.

By Rick St. Hilaire Text copyrighted 2010-2014 by Ricardo A. St. Hilaire, Attorney & Counselor at Law, PLLC. Blog url: culturalheritagelawyer.blogspot.com. Any unauthorized reproduction or retransmission of this post is prohibited. CONTACT INFORMATION: www.culturalheritagelawyer.com

Wednesday, April 9, 2014

For Richer or Poorer: Commentary on The Economics of Cultural Property Laws

The Economics of Cultural Property Laws” presents a controversial study that attempts to wed archaeology--a knowledge-gathering discipline focused on exacting evidence collection, thoughtful research, and a deep concern for heritage preservation--to a production-based enterprise evaluated only by the many spectacular objects it can generate.

The article, which offers more sophistry than careful study, appears in The Indonesian Journal of International & Comparative Law, Volume 1, Issue 1 (January 2014). It has gained notoriety after being published in a Los Angeles Times op-ed piece this week, albeit in an abbreviated fashion and with a muted accentuation on economics. The op-ed is titled "The Archaeology Paradox: More Laws, Less Treasure."

The study's author laments in the LA Times that the world today is "culturally poorer" because major archaeological discoveries are made less often, singularly blaming "rigid cultural property laws" as the apparent reason why there are fewer spectacular excavations.

A careful reading of the underlying Indonesian Journal article suggests an undertone that archaeology is akin to a mining operation whose primary mission is to produce fantastic raw materials for consumption. Indeed, the author openly advocates for what he calls "the [archaeological] source nation's comparative advantage in raw antiquities."

To prove the hypothesis that "[c]ultural property laws ... reduce the source country’s archaeology market and drive up excavation costs," the author employs commercial terms that are ill-suited to the discipline of archaeology. For example, the author writes that "[archaeological] [s]ource nations can maximize their comparative advantage by selling future interests in buried artifacts to archaeologists with the resources to excavate them."

Statements like these cause one to wonder whether the harvesting of consumer-driven heritage is under discussion rather than authentic archaeology. Indeed, the author ultimately--and wrongly--measures the richness of cultural heritage by simply counting the number of sites par excellence that the archaeologist's trowel has excavated, those found on UNESCO's World Heritage List. The other thousands of sites spanning the globe are overlooked, their information about the past evidently discarded as insignificant to the richness of humanity's heritage.

The study should acknowledge that archaeology is not really archaeology when the discipline is transformed into a shovel-ready enterprise that simply waits to employ diggers and equipment for the purpose of generating the choicest inventories. Archaeology's purpose, by contrast, is to "preserve, protect, and interpret the precious record of the human past by employing the highest ethical, professional, and intellectual standards," a goal aptly stated by the Archaeological Institute of America's vision statement.

Do cultural patrimony laws instigate cultural poverty as the study's author suggests? The truth is that cultural poverty begins when non-renewable heritage resources are ripped from the earth without proper scientific documentation and study. We are culturally poorer when knowledge of the past is irretrievably lost because looters and vandals have knowingly or recklessly tampered with the hard evidence preserved beneath the ground. Cultural poverty persists when stolen artifacts are smuggled, fenced, and unlawfully purchased. That is why cultural patrimony laws, which help hold criminals accountable and which aid in separating wrongdoers from their illegal profits, enjoy a highly ranked place in heritage preservation.

Neither the law nor authentic archaeology can divorce themselves from serious cultural heritage protection measures.

Photo credit: Russell Hugo

By Rick St. Hilaire Text copyrighted 2010-2014 by Ricardo A. St. Hilaire, Attorney & Counselor at Law, PLLC. Blog url: culturalheritagelawyer.blogspot.com. Any unauthorized reproduction or retransmission of this post is prohibited. CONTACT INFORMATION: www.culturalheritagelawyer.com

Thursday, April 3, 2014

"The Law Cited by Plaintiffs Does Not Offer the Remedy They Seek" - Rubin v. Iran

"The court recognizes the tragic circumstances that gave rise to the instant action, but finds that the law cited by plaintiffs does not offer the remedy they seek." With these words, Judge Robert Gettleman ended the Northern District of Illinois case of Jenny Rubin, et al. v. Islamic Republic of Iran, et al. v. The University of Chicago and The Field Museum of Natural History.

The case involves American victims of a Hamas suicide bombing in Jerusalem in 1997. A federal judge in Washington, DC in 2003 awarded the plaintiffs a $71.5 million default judgment against Iran, holding that country to be responsible for the attack. One way the plaintiffs have sought to collect the judgment owed to them is to acquire ancient Iranian artifacts at prominent American Museums, including Chicago's Oriental Institute (OI) and The Field Museum, through attachment. They have been unsuccessful thus far.

Persepolis
OI holds the Persepolis and Chogha Mish Collections, consisting of objects acquired from Iran as part of long-term loans for the purpose of academic study. About 30,000 clay tablets make up the Persepolis Collection, loaned by the National Museum of Iran in 1937. The Chogha Mish Collection is made up of clay seal impressions excavated in the 1960's.

The Herzfeld Collection, meanwhile, consists of 1200 artifacts purchased by The Field Museum in April 1945 for $7300. The Field Museum sold some of the artifacts to OI in 1945, but later took back a portion. The Rubin plaintiffs have contended that Herzfeld objects found in both the Field Museum's and the OI's collections were stolen from Iran after their excavation, which occurred during the early part of the twentieth century. But The Field Museum continues to assert ownership, and Iran has not made any claim to the collection.

Both the museums and Iran have been fighting the plaintiffs' attachment case. They petitioned the Illinois federal district court for summary judgment in August, arguing that there were no issues of material fact and that they were entitled to have the plaintiffs' case dismissed as a matter of law. Judge Gettleman last week agreed.

The court adopted the defendants' position that the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (FSIA) cannot be used to award the artifacts to the plaintiffs. The FSIA is the federal law that protects foreign states from lawsuits, and makes foreign sovereign property located in the United States immune from attachment.

The plaintiffs argued that Section 1610 of the FSIA makes a "commercial activity" exception by declaring that “[a] foreign state shall not be immune from the jurisdiction of courts … in which rights in property taken in violation of international law are in issue and that property … is present in the United States in connection with a commercial activity carried on in the United States by the foreign state … [or an] instrumentality of the foreign state ….”  (emphasis added). The museums argued that their collections were not part of any Iranian commercial activity, and that they were not acting as agents for Iran in any type of commercial activity.

Judge Gettleman concluded, "Because Section 1610 of the FSIA requires the commercial activity to be conducted by the sovereign ... the court finds that the [museum] assets are not subject to attachment under Section 1610 of the FSIA."

Even Congress' amendment to the FSIA, known as the National Defense Authorization Act or 1610(g), does not permit the plaintiffs to seize the asset artifacts, the court ruled. The plaintiffs argued that the amendment permitted execution against all terror states’ assets. The court disagreed and held that "if Section 1610(g) provided a separate basis for attachment that allowed the execution against all terror states’ assets, regardless of whether they are blocked assets, certain subsections of Section 1610 would be unnecessary." "The plain language indicates that Section 1610(g) is not a separate basis of attachment," the court added, explaining that the plaintiffs could not find convincingly argue a brand new exception to the sovereign immunity rule. "The court therefore finds that Section 1610(g) does not provide a new basis for plaintiffs to attach the assets of Iran, and does not subject the collections in question to attachment and execution."

Judge Gettleman additionally ruled that the Terrorism Risk Insurance Act (TRIA) does not permit the plaintiffs to seize the artifacts. TRIA allows a plaintiff to attach the "blocked assets" of a "terrorist party" found liable for an act of terrorism. "Blocked assets" are those “seized or frozen by the United States under ... the Trading with the Enemy Act or under ... the International Emergency Economic Powers Act.” The court's order succinctly explained, "Because the [Persepolis and  Chogha Mish Collections] assets in question are not 'blocked' under TRIA, they are not subject to attachment by the plaintiffs under that statute." 

Regarding the Herzfeld objects, Judge Gettleman relied on the First Circuit Court of Appeals decision in the companion Rubin v. Iran case involving attachment of ancient Iranian artifacts from the Museum of Fine Arts, Boston and the Harvard museums. The First Circuit decision relied on information supplied by the U.S. Treasury Department's Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC), an agency that interprets administrative regulations applicable to TRIA. Gettleman wrote:
The court finds the reasoning of the First Circuit and the interpretation by OFAC compelling. The language cited by OFAC demonstrates ... that only assets contested by Iran, and not by third parties such as judgment creditors, would remain blocked and therefore subject to attachment. The court therefore holds that Iran itself must contest the ownership of the property in order to render an asset contested, and therefore blocked, under the TRIA. Because Iran has not claimed ownership of the antiquities in the Herzfeld Collection or the OI Collection, those assets are not contested or blocked, and therefore are not subject to attachment under TRIA.
The museums' victory in federal district court certainly will not be the last word. Recall that the case of Jenny Rubin, et al. v. Islamic Republic of Iran was restarted in Illinois in July 2012 after the U.S. Supreme Court declined to hear the Rubin plaintiffs' request to have the nation's highest court review a Seventh Circuit decision that ruled against the plaintiffs. It is expected that the attachment case will continue for several more years.

Photo credit: Mira Pavlakovic

By Rick St. Hilaire Text copyrighted 2010-2014 by Ricardo A. St. Hilaire, Attorney & Counselor at Law, PLLC. Blog url: culturalheritagelawyer.blogspot.com. Any unauthorized reproduction or retransmission of this post is prohibited. CONTACT INFORMATION: www.culturalheritagelawyer.com

Monday, March 31, 2014

UPDATED > Back Again: H.R. 4292, The Foreign Cultural Exchange Immunity Clarification Act

First adopted by the U.S. House of Representative in 2012 and then left to die in the Senate, the Foreign Cultural Exchange Immunity Clarification Act (FCEICA) is back, having been reintroduced by three original sponsors along with a new co-sponsor.

Judiciary Committee member Rep. Steve Chabot (R-OH) introduced H.R. 4292 on March 25 along with co-sponsors Rep. John Conyers (D-MI), Rep. Bob Goodlatte (R-VA), and Rep. Steve Cohen (D-TX). Their purpose is to amend the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (FSIA) in order to encourage foreign lending of art to the U.S.

The bill proposes that artwork of cultural significance imported for purposes of temporary exhibition by a cultural institution, and which is in the national interest, will not be considered "commercial activity." That is important because federal law generally protects foreign states from lawsuits except in situations involving "commercial activity."

The concept of "commercial activity" was expanded by the courts in the 2005 case of Malewicz v. City of Amsterdam. That case involved the heirs of Kazimir Malevich who sued Amsterdam in Washington, DC to either recover the artworks that the city’s Stedelijk Museum loaned to American museums or, in the alternative, to receive $150 million in damages. The heirs claimed that the foreign museum unlawfully obtained the paintings.The City of Amsterdam, meanwhile, argued that the Immunity from Seizure Act (IFSA)--not to be confused with the FSIA--protected it from the lawsuit.


IFSA, formally called the Immunity from Seizure Under Judicial Process of Cultural Objects Imported for Temporary Exhibition or Display (22 USC § 2459), protects foreign artwork on temporary loan in America from judicial seizure. It does so by preventing a civil litigant in a U.S. court from claiming the art itself to satisfy a judgment in a lawsuit, for example.

The Malewicz court ruled that Amsterdam had engaged in “commercial activity” under the FSIA. So while IFSA may have protected the actual artwork from seizure, the FSIA did not protect the City of Amsterdam from a damages award, said the court. The FCEICA would correct this contradictory result.

The latest version reintroduces the so-called "Nazi exception," which the bill now words in this fashion:
Nazi-era claims.--[Jurisdictional immunity] shall not apply in any case ... in which rights in property taken in violation of international law are in issue ... and the action is based upon a claim that such work was taken in connection with the acts of a covered government during the covered period [of January 30, 1933 through May 8, 1945]. 
Covered governments are defined as Germany, its allies, Germany's military occupied territories, and cooperating regimes during the period of the Second World War.

CHL supported the bill the last time it made its way to Capitol Hill and recommended modifications that would help to bolster the State Department's review of IFSA requests. CHL once again supports the legislation.

The bill has been referred to the Judiciary Committee.

UPDATE 4/3/13
The full committee of the Judiciary quickly held a markup of the legislation, without a hearing, and yesterday approved the bill by voice vote. The measure will now be sent to the full House for consideration.

The Judiciary Committee declared, "By making a minor change to the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act, this legislation strengthens the ability of U.S. museums and schools to borrow foreign government-owned artwork and cultural artifacts."

A bipartisan statement issued by the bill's Republican and Democratic sponsors announced:
The United States has long recognized the importance of a cultural exchange of ideas through artwork loaned from other countries. We are proud to support this strongly bipartisan legislation that increases Americans’ access to beautiful artwork and artifacts from around the world, fosters knowledge and appreciation of the arts and other cultures, and encourages learning, history and creativity.
Photo credit: Micahel Slonecker

By Rick St. Hilaire Text copyrighted 2010-2014 by Ricardo A. St. Hilaire, Attorney & Counselor at Law, PLLC. Blog url: culturalheritagelawyer.blogspot.com. Any unauthorized reproduction or retransmission of this post is prohibited. CONTACT INFORMATION: www.culturalheritagelawyer.com

Monday, March 24, 2014

Dinosaur Track Gone, Utah Man Indicted for Violation of PRPA

A grand jury indictment handed up this month charges a Utah man with taking and destroying a three-toed dinosaur track near the Hell’s Revenge Trail at the Sand Flats Recreation Area. The area forms part of the the 258 million acres of public lands administered by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM).

The U.S. Attorney for the District of Utah initiated the case of U.S. v. Jared Ehlers less than 30 days after the defendant allegedly removed, stole, and discarded the dinosaur fossil on or around February 17. Authorities believe that the dinosaur footprint was thrown into a river.

An indictment begins the criminal court process. It is not a finding of guilt. A defendant is presumed innocent unless proved guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

The four-count federal indictment--more reminiscent of charging documents filed in state courts because of its brevity--charges Ehlers with violating the 
Paleontological Resources Preservation Act (PRPA) at 16 U.S.C. § 470aaa-5 as well violating three sections of the federal criminal code, namely stealing public property under 18 U.S.C. § 641, damaging federal property under 18 U.S.C. § 1361, and destroying evidence under 18 U.S.C. § 1519.

All together, the possible penalties include a prison term of 45 years, with the longest incarceration potentially coming from the destruction of evidence charge. Ehlers likely would not receive the maximum sentences were he to be convicted.

The case may be among the first of its kind--if not the first case--prosecuted under PRPA. That statute, signed into law on March 30, 2009, 
is an outgrowth of a Department of Interior report published in 2000 titled Assessment of Fossil Management on Federal and Indian Lands. The report recommended that
[f]uture actions should penalize the theft of fossils from federal lands in a way that maximizes the effectiveness of prosecutions and deters future thefts. Penalties should take into account, among other factors, the value of fossils themselves, as well as any damage resulting from their illegal collection.
Federal prosecutors have moved quickly in the Ehlers case, buoyed by federal, state, and county cooperation. The Grand County Sheriff's Office earlier reported that the agency was working with the Utah Department of Safety and BLM to find the fossil track possibly beneath the waters of the Colorado River.

Cultural property prosecutions remain infrequent and require continuing public and judicial support. So it is wise in this case that prosecutors chose to have the defendant summoned to court rather than arrested. The decision contrasts with the FBI and BLM raids in 2009 that ignited a long-running feud between citizens, collectors, dealers, and law enforcement authorities in the American Southwest.

By Rick St. Hilaire Text copyrighted 2010-2014 by Ricardo A. St. Hilaire, Attorney & Counselor at Law, PLLC. Blog url: culturalheritagelawyer.blogspot.com. Any unauthorized reproduction or retransmission of this post is prohibited. CONTACT INFORMATION: www.culturalheritagelawyer.com

Thursday, March 20, 2014

U.K. is Top Source Nation in 2013 for U.S. Imports of Archaeological, Historical, and Ethnological Goods

Switzerland in 2012 was the #1 source of archaeological, historical, and ethnological material imported into the United States. But U.S. import values from that country fell by nearly 99%, leaving the former second place finisher, the United Kingdom, to take the top spot in 2013 as measured by declared customs values of consumable goods.

Data compiled from tariff and trade information supplied by the U.S. Department of Commerce and the U.S. International Trade Commission reveal this latest picture of imports classified by Harmonized Tariff Schedule (HTS) commodity code 9705.00.0070.

The overall total customs value of archaeological, historical, or ethnological goods imported into the U.S. in 2013 amounted to a declared value of $45,647,923, an increase of 22% from 2012

Imports received from the U.K. jumped nearly 54%, totaling $11,451,019. And the U.K. and Egypt together made up nearly half of the $45 million of American imports.

Import values from Egypt skyrocketed 105% at a time of political instability and upheaval. There is a Red List covering cultural heritage from that nation.


Photo credit: Athewma
Israel, which has a legally regulated antiquities market, saw its U.S. import values climb 97%.

India, a source of highly prized artifacts among American collectors, saw a jump of 3805% in its U.S. import values.

Mali, once on the top 20 list of source countries, experienced a 79% collapse in 2013 after the White House, in September 2012, extended import restrictions on endangered Malian cultural heritage. Conakry Terminal on the port city of neighboring Guinea, meanwhile, continues to grow. And in 2013, American archaeological, historical, or ethnological imports from Guinea totaled $347,100, up from $0 the previous year.

Imports from war-torn Syria spiked 1375%. A Red List for threatened cultural heritage is in effect.

The top 20 source countries in 2013 by customs value for archaeological, historical, or ethnological goods were, in descending order, U.K., Egypt, Italy, Democratic Republic of Congo, Germany, Greece, France, Israel, Australia, India, Gabon, Congo, Argentina, Denmark, Norway, Japan, Canada, Guinea, Lebanon, and Spain.

The full list of HTS 9705.00.0070 data is reproduced in the table below. More 2012 data is found here.


HTS NumberCountry20122013Percent Change
2012 - 2013
In Actual Dollars
9705000070United Kingdom7,446,02111,451,01953.8%
9705000070Egypt5,186,16610,655,752105.5%
9705000070Italy4,189,8003,972,732-5.2%
9705000070Congo (DROC)03,465,671N/A
9705000070Germany1,826,4632,052,39812.4%
9705000070Greece928,2541,801,48994.1%
9705000070France1,694,9521,250,293-26.2%
9705000070Israel598,2121,178,98097.1%
9705000070Australia100,7681,080,405972.2%
9705000070India26,9581,052,9333,805.8%
9705000070Gabon0941,213N/A
9705000070Congo (ROC)519,087906,60074.7%
9705000070Argentina0759,100N/A
9705000070Denmark31,771725,0252,182.0%
9705000070Norway0513,717N/A
9705000070Japan14,909401,1462,590.6%
9705000070Canada268,177385,24943.7%
9705000070Guinea0347,100N/A
9705000070Lebanon6,546300,0004,483.0%
9705000070Spain3,494,617242,406-93.1%
9705000070Morocco182,020219,14820.4%
9705000070Austria119,628176,22747.3%
9705000070Madagascar16,360169,900938.5%
9705000070Turkey399,462147,669-63.0%
9705000070Indonesia14,631136,714834.4%
9705000070Papua New Guin46,648135,924191.4%
9705000070Costa Rica0135,867N/A
9705000070Russia32,599134,972314.0%
9705000070Finland0120,101N/A
9705000070Syria6,870101,3491,375.2%
9705000070Netherlands30,63278,996157.9%
9705000070Sweden81,86577,937-4.8%
9705000070Nigeria7,50073,203876.0%
9705000070Mali254,20753,128-79.1%
9705000070China59,21942,288-28.6%
9705000070Ghana20,08036,46381.6%
9705000070Uruguay033,539N/A
9705000070Burkina Faso033,205N/A
9705000070Bulgaria18,00031,37974.3%
9705000070Belgium21,68625,03615.4%
9705000070South Africa54,81623,764-56.6%
9705000070Ireland32,36322,790-29.6%
9705000070Ukraine170,67021,257-87.5%
9705000070Switzerland8,710,03720,870-99.8%
9705000070Taiwan020,000N/A
9705000070Saudi Arabia019,540N/A
9705000070Poland21,37911,575-45.9%
9705000070Solomon Is011,500N/A
9705000070Brazil3,00010,000233.3%
9705000070Uzbekistan3,0008,793193.1%
9705000070Jordan4,6008,00073.9%
9705000070Colombia06,127N/A
9705000070Romania5,5005,5000.0%
9705000070Togo04,730N/A
9705000070Iceland03,704N/A
9705000070Chile3,5003,5000.0%
9705000070Thailand10,2210-100.0%
9705000070Mauritania7,4250-100.0%
9705000070Albania2,0700-100.0%
9705000070Korea202,7300-100.0%
9705000070Serbia2,5750-100.0%
9705000070Algeria13,1520-100.0%
9705000070Singapore49,2000-100.0%
9705000070Malaysia7,7940-100.0%
9705000070Macedonia42,8000-100.0%
9705000070Niger6,9920-100.0%
9705000070New Zealand168,4540-100.0%
9705000070Czech Republic3,7300-100.0%
9705000070Philippines22,4650-100.0%
9705000070Cameroon9,0220-100.0%
9705000070Senegal3,2070-100.0%
9705000070Mexico19,3800-100.0%
9705000070Peru59,0140-100.0%
9705000070New Caledonia3,7500-100.0%
9705000070Portugal18,6550-100.0%
9705000070Burundi14,5000-100.0%
9705000070Pakistan25,2280-100.0%
9705000070Afghanistan5,6990-100.0%
9705000070Fr Polynesia2,5000-100.0%
9705000070Montenegro25,0000-100.0%
Total37,378,53645,647,92322.1%

The numbers posted here do not document the broader category of "collections and collectors' pieces of zoological, botanical, mineralogical, anatomical, historical, archeological, paleontological, ethnographic or numismatic interest" classified by HTS 9705.  The statistics posted are only those covering  HTS 9705's subcategory of archaeological, historical, and ethnological material under HTS 9705.00.0070. Note too that HTS 9705 excludes "antiques" over 100 years old (e.g., silverware and furniture), which are classified elsewhere by HTS 9706.

By Rick St. Hilaire Text copyrighted 2010-2014 by Ricardo A. St. Hilaire, Attorney & Counselor at Law, PLLC. Blog url: culturalheritagelawyer.blogspot.com. Any unauthorized reproduction or retransmission of this post is prohibited. CONTACT INFORMATION: www.culturalheritagelawyer.com

Monday, March 17, 2014

With All Deliberate Speed: Implementing Emergency Import Controls on Cultural Objects from Egypt

Import controls must be implemented with all deliberate speed, particularly now that a potential request to protect endangered Egyptian artifacts has been announced publicly.

Cultural heritage watchers over the last few years have witnessed the destruction to cultural heritage that has been inflicted on archaeological sites, storehouses, museums, and places of worship in Egypt. The crisis has been severe, prompting the International Council of Museums in 2012 to issue its Emergency Red List of Egyptian Cultural Objects at Risk.

But the lack of comprehensive action to stem the looting and smuggling of cultural heritage has afforded heritage traffickers the advantage of a three year head start to move their ill-gotten gains to the United States. Calls by CHL in January 2011 and July 2013 for emergency import protections were not received with urgency.

Last week, however, Tom Mashberg of The New York Times reported that the State Department and the Egyptian Minister of State for Antiquities spoke about implementing American emergency import measures. By the terms of the Convention on Cultural Property Implementation Act (CPIA), the State Department must receive a formal request from the Egyptian government for that process to officially begin. The Federal Register has not yet reported such a formal request, although Mashberg writes that Egypt is looking "for fast action on the restrictions."

Now that the prospect of emergency restrictions on the importation of Egyptian artifacts appears real, traffickers are likely to increase shipments of heritage contraband to the U.S. before barriers are raised. And that is why emergency import measures must be implemented immediately.

Photo credit: Leonardo Barbosa

By Rick St. Hilaire Text copyrighted 2010-2014 by Ricardo A. St. Hilaire, Attorney & Counselor at Law, PLLC. Blog url: culturalheritagelawyer.blogspot.com. Any unauthorized reproduction or retransmission of this post is prohibited. CONTACT INFORMATION: www.culturalheritagelawyer.com

Wednesday, March 12, 2014

U.S.-Honduras MoU Extended, Ecclesiastical Ethnological Heritage Added to Import Rules

Copán archaeological site in Honduras.
The Treasury Department and Customs and Border Protection today issued final rules in support of a five year extension of the cultural property Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) between the U.S. and Honduras.

The import rules, which protect endangered cultural heritage from Honduras, were finalized in response to the State Department's conclusion that "conditions continue to warrant the imposition of import restrictions on the archaeological materials from Honduras...."

The renewed MoU contains added import protections covering threatened ecclesiastical ethnological material dating from Honduras' Colonial Period. Sculpture, paintings, and metalwork such as chalices and crucifixes are now objects subject to American import controls.

A complete list outlining the full range of archaeological and ethnological objects subject to import restrictions may be found here.

Voices from the collecting and museum communities last year expressed concern or outright opposition to a renewed agreement that would have protected Colonial and Republican cultural heritage objects. The Association of Art Museum Directors, for example, offered support for the Honduran MoU but cautioned that care should be taken to define exactly what objects should be protected and what dates should be used. The final rules issued today appear to have responded to these concerns by specifying ecclesiastical ethnological goods dating from c.1502-1821 A.D.

The U.S. first entered into a bilateral agreement with Honduras in 2004 after the cultural patrimony found in that Central American nation was found to be in jeopardy from pillage, particularly from archaeological site looting. The U.S. later renewed the MoU in 2009 for another five years, the time frame allowed by the Convention on Cultural Property Implementation Act (CPIA), which gives legal force to the 1970 UNESCO Convention on the Means of Prohibiting and Preventing the Illicit Import, Export and Transfer of Ownership of Cultural Property.

Cultural objects covered by the MoU's import rules may legally pass through American borders when accompanied by either an export permit or proof showing that they left Honduras prior to the adoption of the restrictions. Prohibited cultural material may be detained, seized, and forfeited by customs authorities as contraband, and smugglers could face criminal prosecution.

Importers would do well to remember that the 1973 Pre-Columbian Monumental or Architectural Sculpture or Murals Statute still applies, permitting import of the goods designated in the law so long as the importer produces a valid export certificate or offers proof that the imported heritage objects left Honduras before June 1, 1973.

Photo credit: Krzysztof Szkurlatowsi

By Rick St. Hilaire Text copyrighted 2010-2014 by Ricardo A. St. Hilaire, Attorney & Counselor at Law, PLLC. Blog url: culturalheritagelawyer.blogspot.com. Any unauthorized reproduction or retransmission of this post is prohibited. CONTACT INFORMATION: www.culturalheritagelawyer.com