articles by Evelien Campfens
Santander Art and Culture Law Review, 2022
Guest editorial
Fifty years after the UN General Assembly first urged the return of cultural objects to "countrie... more Fifty years after the UN General Assembly first urged the return of cultural objects to "countries victims of expropriation" (UNGA Resolution 3187, 18 December 1973), and twenty years after the 2002 Declaration on the Importance and Value of Universal Museums, in which museums justified their continued possession of colonial artefacts, the topic of restitution has entered a new phase. Several European states and heritage institutions GUEST EDITORIAL * Evelien Campfens is post-doc fellow at the Research Group "Museums Collections and Society" of Leiden University, where her research focuses on the protection and ownership of cultural heritage. Between 2001 and 2015 she was director of the Dutch Restitutions Committee for Nazi-looted art, and presently also is a member of the Ethical Committee of the Dutch Museum Association.
Netherlands International Law Review, 2020
This article suggests that, irrespective of the acquired rights of others, original owners should... more This article suggests that, irrespective of the acquired rights of others, original owners should still be able to rely on a ‘heritage title’ if there is a continuing cultural link. The term aims to capture the legal bond between cultural objects and people, distinct from ownership, and is informed by international cultural heritage and human rights law norms. The proposition is that, whilst ownership interests are accounted for in national private law, legal tools are lacking to address heritage interests and identity values that are acknowledged in international law. Neither the existing legal framework for the art trade, based on the 1970 UNESCO Convention, nor regular ownership concepts appear particularly suited to solve title issues over contested cultural objects. The notion of ‘heritage title’ in a human rights law approach can act as a bridge in that regard
Art Antiquity and Law, 2020
In the Netherlands, as in many other jurisdictions, claims to Nazi-looted art form a ‘grey catego... more In the Netherlands, as in many other jurisdictions, claims to Nazi-looted art form a ‘grey category’ where positive law is at odds with ethical norms. Dutch private law, like other civil law systems, is characterised by a strong protection of legal security and the interests of new possessors, leaving little scope for title claims based on a loss which occurred longer than 75 years ago. On the other hand, the Dutch Restitutions Committee (the ‘Restitutiecommissie’) has recommended the return of almost 600 works of art to Nazi victims or their heirs since its establishment in 2002. How can this apparent contradiction be explained? How is a ‘claimant-unfriendly’ legal reality brought into line with international soft law instruments like the 1998 Washington Principles? And what is the relevance of the special Dutch post-War legislation that was adopted with an eye on the restoration of individual rights that were lost as a result of Nazi looting, today? These questions are addressed in this article. To that end, as an introduction to the topic, section 1 renders a brief historical overview of Nazi looting in the Netherlands and the organisation with regard to recovery and restitution in the post-War period. Section 2 deals with the post-War legal framework that may be of relevance for artefacts that were looted or sold in the Netherlands during the Nazi period. Furthermore, section 3 deals with the legal framework for claims regarding artefacts that, today, are found within the Dutch jurisdiction, addressing both the ‘hard’ and ‘soft’ law regulations (i.e. black-letter law and the ‘ethical’ model of the Dutch Restitutions Committee). Section 4 concludes with some final remarks.
International Journal of Cultural Property, 2019
The return of cultural objects lost as a result of colonial rule is a controversial issue. A comm... more The return of cultural objects lost as a result of colonial rule is a controversial issue. A common response is: “it was legal at the time” and, therefore, not a legal issue. But is that so? This article argues that it is not a lack of legal norms that explains this belated discussion but, rather, the asymmetrical application of norms. Moreover, a human rights law approach, focusing on the heritage aspect of cultural objects for people today—instead of a sole focus on property title—offers useful tools to structure this field. To illustrate these points, a case concerning an African ancestral sculpture today known as the “Bangwa Queen” will be assessed on its merits under international law. The Bangwa Queen is of spiritual importance to the Bangwa, a people indigenous to the western part of Cameroon. She was taken as part of a collection of so-called lefem figures by German colonizers in 1899 and is currently part of a French museum collection.
Santander Art and Culture Law Review, 2018
While international conventions clearly establish the rule that misappropriated artefacts should ... more While international conventions clearly establish the rule that misappropriated artefacts should be returned, the situation with respect to losses that predate these conventions is highly fragmented. The question of whose interests are given priority in title disputes that regard such losses – those of the former owner or a new possessor – vary per jurisdiction. Given the fragmented situation, international soft-law instruments promote an ethical approach and alternative dispute resolution (ADR) as a way of filling this “gap”. A lack of transparent neutral procedures to implement and clarify soft-law norms has proven problematic in this regard. The questions raised in this paper are: why is ADR necessary; and what about guarantees in terms of access to justice in such an “ethical” framework? Two recent initiatives are discussed in this article: the European Parliament resolution of 17 January 2019 on cross-border restitution claims of works of art and cultural goods looted in armed conflicts and wars; and the newly established Court of Arbitration for Art in The Hague.
Art Antiquity and Law, 2017
Voelkerrechtblog, 2018
The return of treasures taken during the era of European imperialism is a controversial issue. A ... more The return of treasures taken during the era of European imperialism is a controversial issue. A common response is ‘it was legal at the time’ and, therefore, not a legal issue. Is that indeed so? In this contribution, I argue that it is not a lack of legal norms that explains this belated discussion, but the asymmetrical application of norms. A human rights law approach, focussing on the heritage aspect of cultural objects and their importance for (groups of) people today, offers useful tools to address the intangible interests at stake in such disputes.
Art Antiquity and Law, 2017
This article analyzes the norm, its rationale, and international practice in the field of Nazi lo... more This article analyzes the norm, its rationale, and international practice in the field of Nazi looted art. It makes a case for clear standards and transparent neutral procedures where such standards could be further developed.
misc by Evelien Campfens
EUropean Parliament, Policy Department, 2023
This study examines how cultural heritage can be better protected from the effects of armed confl... more This study examines how cultural heritage can be better protected from the effects of armed conflicts, in Ukraine and beyond.
inbooks by Evelien Campfens
book chapters by Evelien Campfens
Uploads
articles by Evelien Campfens
misc by Evelien Campfens
inbooks by Evelien Campfens
book chapters by Evelien Campfens
claims are often not supported by positive law at all. On the other hand, non-binding regulations urge present possessors to find `just' solutions to claims – not as a legal obligation but as a matter of morality. This raises a fundamental question: if we believe that the application of the law leads to injustice, is it not time to change the way the law is applied?
This study explores how cross-border claims to cultural objects fit in the wider legal framework, and where blind spots or clashes occur. The overall aim of this dissertation is to identify new directions that can help further develop this field, with the ultimate aim of fostering just solutions.