Netherlands: Amsterdam court rules in favour of Ukraine in Scythian gold dispute with Russia

У вашего броузера проблема в совместимости с HTML5

Follow us on Telegram:
https://t.me/s/ruptlynews

The Amsterdam Court of Appeal, headed by Judge Pauline Hofmeijer-Rutten, ruled on Tuesday that the collection of Crimean gold, consisting of 650 priceless artefacts, ‘must be handed over to Ukraine.’
After the annexation of Crimea by Russia in March 2014, the Allard Pierson Museum had hesitated to return the treasures, dubbed the ‘Scythian gold,’ because it was uncertain who had become the rightful owner. The four museums on the peninsula, then under the Russian administration, declared that the artefacts belonged to them. On the other hand, Ukraine demanded the return of the gold because, in its opinion, the treasure was a national cultural property and state property of Ukraine that did not belong to Moscow.
Back in 2016, an Amsterdam court already ruled in favour of Kyiv. The museums of Crimea appealed against this ruling, but the 2016 decision was confirmed once again by the Amsterdam Court of Appeal on Tuesday. However, this second ruling can still be appealed.

The Scythian gold collection is currently kept in Amsterdam’s Allard Pearson Museum.

SOT, Pauline Hofmeijer-Rutten, Presiding judge of Court of Appeal of Amsterdam: “Although the museums pieces are originally from Crimea and to that extend may be considered a part of Crimean Culture Heritage, they are part of the Culture Heritage of the Ukrainian State as it has existed as a independent state since 1991.”

SOT, Pauline Hofmeijer-Rutten, Presiding judge of Court of Appeal of Amsterdam: “The Court of Appeal finds that cultural interest that lies in preserving the museum pieces is a public interest of the Ukrainian State that carries great weight. The Ukrainian State has safeguarded its interest by adopting the law on museums and museum affairs in 1995. That law provides a protective regime. Even if the museum pieces continue to exist and stay undamaged, the law of museums has the purpose of preventing museum pieces, such as these, from leaving the Ukrainian State sphere of influence.”

SOT, Pauline Hofmeijer-Rutten, Presiding judge of Court of Appeal of Amsterdam: “The order directs that the museum pieces are to be transported to the national museum of History of Ukraine in Kiev, pending stabilization of the situation in Crimea. This is a temporary measure.”

SOT, Pauline Hofmeijer-Rutten, Presiding judge of Court of Appeal of Amsterdam: “The Court of Appeal finds that the Ukrainian State was allowed to take such a temporary measure to protect its cultural heritage and notwithstanding the museums’ right to operational management. The public interests at stake are of great weight and this case is closely connected to the Ukrainian State.”

SOT, Pauline Hofmeijer-Rutten, Presiding judge of Court of Appeal of Amsterdam: “The Court of Appeal now rules that the right of the Ukrainian State, based on the law of museum regulation on the order, takes precedence. The contractual obligation cannot be performed. On the basis of provisional Ukrainian law, the APM (Allard Pierson Museum) is no longer obliged to return the objects to the Crimea museums. The APM asks for a declaratory judgement to that effect and it has been granted.”

SOT, Gert-Jan TM van den Bergh, Lawyer representing Ukrainian authorities: “The artefacts will stay here as long as the proceedings at the Supreme Court will last. I mean we are most certain that the Crimean museums will decide to appeal to the Supreme Court in The Hague. Should the Supreme Court decide that this decision stands, then obviously the artefacts will be back to Kiev.”

SOT, Gert-Jan TM van den Bergh, Lawyer representing Ukrainian authorities: “The decision that the artefacts are an integral part of the central museum funds of Ukraine and should be regarded as national cultural heritage and that there is only one entity that has the total say of these artefacts, and that is the Ministry of Culture in Kiev, so from that standing point, it’s a very important decision and we are very happy.”

SOT, Rob Meijer, Lawyer representing Crimea museums: “It is terribly sad because all these treasures, these 650 artifacts, have never been part of Ukraine. They have been excavated in Crimea, they have been taken care of or restored and exhibited always in Crimea. It was as far as we know never one dime of subsidy by Ukrainian authorities in favour of the museums.”

SOT, Rob Meijer, Lawyer representing Crimea museums: “The court has not gone as far as to order the enforcement of its own judgement, that will depend on whether or not the Crimean museums will go to the Dutch Supreme Court. That possibility is still there.”

#Russia #Crimea #Ukraine #ScythianGold

Video ID: 20211026-055

Video on Demand: https://ruptly.tv/videos/20211026-055
Contact: [email protected]

Twitter: http://twitter.com/Ruptly
Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/Ruptly