Cultural Heritage Property Disputes In International Arbitration Proceedings
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.60131/adr.1.2024.8343Keywords:
Cultural heritage, international economic law, investment law, alternative dispute resolution, mediation, arbitration, international investment agreement.Abstract
The article's purpose is to argue why arbitration is beneficial for users despite the availability of a wide range of alternative dispute resolution (ADR) means to the parties involved in cultural heritage disputes. While litigation is a time-consuming, expensive, and public process, arbitration offers a speedy and confidential alternative. This offers more flexibility and control over the results than litigation. The tension between investor rights and cultural heritage protection raises several questions. Is the measure implemented by the state justified by the fact that it aims to protect cultural heritage? Can governments use cultural policies to discourage investment or discriminate against foreign investors? It is important to clarify the extent to which arbitral tribunals pay attention to cultural heritage and how they balance the rights of the investor and the cultural policies of the host state.
References
Convention for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict with Regulations for the Execution of the Convention, The Hague, 14.05.1954 https://www.unesco.org/ [02.12.2024].
The UNESCO 1970 Convention on the Means of Prohibiting and Preventing the Illicit Import, Export and Transfer of Ownership of Cultural Property, Paris,14.11.1970 https://www.unesco.org/ [02.12.2024].
UNIDROIT Convention on Stolen or Illegally Exported Cultural Objects Rome, 24 June 1995, https://www.unidroit.org/instruments/cultural-property/1995-convention/
The UNESCO 1972 World Heritage Convention https://whc.unesco.org/en/convention/ [02.12.2024].
Adenekan V.O., An Appraisal of the Existing Legal Frameworks for the Resolution of Cultural Heritage Disputes and the Enforcement of Cultural Heritage Law, December 2019, 6.
Arsic M., Mediation in cultural heritage disputes – pro et contra, 2021, 135-136.
Campfens E., Restitution of Looted Art: What About Access to Justice? Santander Art and Culture Law Review, May 2019, 193.
Chechi A., Evaluating the Establishment of an International Cultural Heritage Court, Vol. XVIII, Issue 1, Art Antiquity and Law, April 2013.
Gazzini F.I., Cultural Property Disputes: The Role of Arbitration in resolving Non-Contractual Disputes, 2004,118-119.
ICOM, Art and Cultural Heritage Mediation, An alternative litigation resolution method adapted to art and cultural heritage fields, 12 July, 2011 in Paris.
Anaya J., Special Rapporteur on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, UN Human Rights Council, The Status of Indigenous Peoples’ Rights in Panama, A/HRC/27/52/Add.1, 3 July 2014, para.13.
Kasteleijn L., Grenfell L., Using arbitration to resolve cultural property disputes, Mar 2023, 15, https://www.lexisnexis.co.uk/blog/research-legal-analysis/using-arbitration-to-resolve-cultural-property-disputes [02.12.2024].
Polasek M., Puig S., ICSID Review - Foreign Investment Law Journal, Volume 22, Issue 2, Fall 2007, 446–454, https://rb.gy/ku8dab [02.12.2024].
Puig S., Social Capital in the Arbitration Market, 2014, European Journal of International Law, Vol. 25, Issue 2, 387-424, 397.
Vadi V., Cultural heritage in international investment law and arbitration Cambridge University Press, 2014, 1-2, 25, 70.
Vadi V., Cultural Heritage in International Economic Law, Brill | Nijhoff, 2023, 2, 58-59, 103, 106, 167-168, 213, 162-163, 175-176.
Varner E., Atbitrating Cultural Property Disputes, Cardozo Journal of Conflict Resolution, Spring 2012, Vol.13, 480-485, 514-515, 476, 503.
UN Economic and Social Council, Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, General Comment No. 21, Right of Everyone to Take Part in Cultural Life, Article 15, para. 1(a) of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, E/C.12/GC/21, 21 December 2009, para.11,13.
Glamis Gold, Ltd. v. United States of America, Award, 8 June 2009.
Altmann v. Republic of Austria, 142 F.Supp.2d 1187 (C.D. Cal. 1999) a 443. Maria V. Altmann, Francis Gutmann, Trevor Mantle, George Bentley, and Dr. Nelly Auersperg v. Republic of Austria (Jan. 15, 2006) (Arbitral award in German). Majken Hofmann, Anna Lokrantz, Maria Muller, Andreas Muller Hofmann und Lena Muller Hofmann v. Republic of Austria (Nov. 21, 2005) (Arbitral award in German). C. Renold et al., Case Six Klimt Paintings – Maria Altmann and Austria, Platform Ar Themis, March 2012, <http://unige.ch/art-adr> [02.12.2024].
Condition of Sale in California, New York, Bonhams & Butterfields.
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
