Dear Giovanni,

Thank you for bringing this issue (State of Italy versus the Getty Museum)
up again. I appreciate every effort to bring a broader debate on ICOM and
its position on Illicit Traffic forward.

I do not believe that it has ever been ICOM's active policy to position
itself as a mediator. I support that policy, because ICOM is never meant to
be an organisation that actively seeks mediation. It does not have the means
nor the legal position to do so. This is a matter for the courts. And there
is always the possibility to bring a case for mediation to UNESCO.

ICOM may of course assist those members who ask for assistance in matters of
legal action, but only to a certain limit.

ICOM's basic task here is to set standards and it does so principally by
means of its Code of Ethics. That is a major assignment which ICOM pursues
with great care and intellectual and professional dedication of a high
standard.

And, I quote the President:
"It should be emphasized that the ICOM Code of Ethics for Museums, to which
all individual and institutional members are bound, reaches beyond a
lowest-level legal compliance framework of address to disputed ownership of
cultural property from within the provisions of some national laws."

The question remains whether ICOM could or should do more to stress the
importance of the question of Illicit Traffic of Cultural Objects. And on
this point it could consider to take a more pro-active approach. It is well
known that there are some museums in the world, that do not live up to the
standards, set by ICOM's code of Ethics and especially on the point of Valid
Title, Provenance and Due Diligence.

And although, once again, ICOM is neither prosecutor nor judge, it could
bring proper cases to the fore. This would without doubt be highly
appreciated by its members who do live up to the standards of the Code of
Ethics.

The process of awareness-raising deserves some extra input. The case between
the State of Italy and the Getty museum is a case in kind. The Italian
Carabinieri have been very persistent as has the Los Angeles Times and
others. Unfortunately ICOM has never had the courage to actively involve
itself in raising the awareness with respect to this case. And of course, as
former Secretary General I also blame myself for that. We have seen how much
success a bit of involvement can have in the case with the Nigerian NOK
objects in the Louvre, which received world-wide attention for a great deal
thanks to ICOM (and especially Valerie Jullien's persistence in this
specific case).  And I also mention the excellent work done by AAM-ICOM on
Holocaust looted art.


Raising awareness, if done well, will not do any harm, quite the contrary,
it can lead the way. I admire the Getty Museum and the people working there.
It is a great museum and its staff does a great job and  they are in many
ways exemplary for the museum world. Notwithstanding that they should and
could have moved much earlier and prevented the situation in which they find
themselves now. 

The Getty case gets a lot of attention. Rightly so, but there are more
museums that should follow the standards set by ICOM a bit more
conscientiously. And ICOM can help them with that.

Because (and I quote our President once again):
"The role of museums and their influence on illicit trafficking is not at
all a marginal issue, as some commentators have sought to argue for many
years."

Manus Brinkman

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Change ICOM-L subscription options, unsubscribe, and search the
archives at:  http://home.ease.lsoft.com/archives/icom-l.html