The Government of Cambodia has been criticized for its undemocratic ways and its border disputes with Thailand. Yet, the US State Department, its Cultural Heritage Center, and its allies in the archaeological community-- including the Department of State funded “Heritage Watch” --have been instrumental in imposing broad restrictions on cultural goods from Cambodia. This, despite the wide availability of this material in markets abroad and the forthright admission by Cambodia’s representative at the most recent CPAC hearing that the Cambodian Army is deeply involved in the supply of ancient Cambodian artifacts to world markets. See http://culturalpropertyobserver.blogspot.com/2008/09/cambodian-import-restrictions-extended.html
Now, the Government, again supported by the archaeological lobby, is seeking to seize a Cambodian artifact from Sotheby’s based on allegations that the statute was stolen from an archaeological site, presumably during the dislocation associated with fall of the US-Supported Cambodian government during the aftermath of the Vietnam war. See : http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/05/arts/design/ancient-cambodian-statue-is-seized-from-sothebys.html?_r=1
My advice to Sotheby’s would be to fight. Experience teaches that press reports sourced to the archaeological lobby may not provide either a complete or accurate depiction of the actual strength of the Government’s case. If SLAM can prevail, perhaps Sotheby’s can as well.
The seizure does, however, suggests that Sotheby’s hiring of a former prosecutor, Jane Levine, has not protected Sotheby’s and its consigners from the aggressive repatriation efforts of the US Government.
Moreover, the seizure raises further questions about whether Jane Levine can serve as an effective member of CPAC or whether her defense of Sotheby’s import of the statue for auction raises conflict of interest issues that cannot be adequately addressed.
Showing posts with label ICE. Show all posts
Showing posts with label ICE. Show all posts
Wednesday, April 4, 2012
Thursday, September 15, 2011
You Throw the Party, ICE Will Bring the Old Pottery
ICE is publicizing the repatriation of a common pre-Columbian bowl to Belize. See
http://www.ice.gov/news/releases/1109/110914washingtondc.htm
The repatriation took place at an embassy event celebrating the 30th anniversary of the country's independence from Great Britain. We are told that it was recovered after a search warrant was executed in New Mexico, but we have few other details about the basis of the seizure.
Was there any evidence linking this bowl to an archaeological site or was the fact that it was a bowl identified as coming from Belize enough for ICE to seize it, presumably without any effort by the owner to contest the seizure?
How much did orchestrating this publicity stunt at the Embassy cost the American taxpayer? What will the authorities do with such a common bowl? Put it on display somewhere? Probably not except perhaps as some sort of trophy.
http://www.ice.gov/news/releases/1109/110914washingtondc.htm
The repatriation took place at an embassy event celebrating the 30th anniversary of the country's independence from Great Britain. We are told that it was recovered after a search warrant was executed in New Mexico, but we have few other details about the basis of the seizure.
Was there any evidence linking this bowl to an archaeological site or was the fact that it was a bowl identified as coming from Belize enough for ICE to seize it, presumably without any effort by the owner to contest the seizure?
How much did orchestrating this publicity stunt at the Embassy cost the American taxpayer? What will the authorities do with such a common bowl? Put it on display somewhere? Probably not except perhaps as some sort of trophy.
Thursday, August 19, 2010
ICE Returns Khmer Artifacts, But Questions Remain
ICE has issued a press release about the repatriation of Khmer artifacts to Cambodia. See http://www.ice.gov/pi/nr/1008/100818washingtondc.htm
The artifacts were seized as part of a larger investigation into the smuggling of South Asian Art.
Although the seizures were made with great fanfare, the actual legal proceedings seem limited and instead the investigation has been marred by the death of one of the its targets in police custody. As a result, her family received a large sum to settle a federal tort claims action.
I also find the government's allegations related to the theft of Ban Chiang pottery from Thailand to be questionable given the continuing availability of such pottery openly for sale within Thailand itself. See http://www.thaiwebsites.com/antiques.asp
The artifacts were seized as part of a larger investigation into the smuggling of South Asian Art.
Although the seizures were made with great fanfare, the actual legal proceedings seem limited and instead the investigation has been marred by the death of one of the its targets in police custody. As a result, her family received a large sum to settle a federal tort claims action.
I also find the government's allegations related to the theft of Ban Chiang pottery from Thailand to be questionable given the continuing availability of such pottery openly for sale within Thailand itself. See http://www.thaiwebsites.com/antiques.asp
Sunday, March 14, 2010
Pre-1970 Provenance No Safe Harbor for Egyptian Antiquities?
The Archaeological Institute of American ("AIA") has sought to reassure us it is not anti-collecting. Rather, according to various pronouncements, the AIA purports to only want collectors to purchase artifacts with provenances dating back to 1970, the year of the UNESCO Convention. See http://www.archaeological.org/webinfo.php?page=10421
If so, the 1970 date may very well not be much of a "safe harbor"now that the US Government has repatriated an ancient Egyptian sarcophagus at a ceremony conducted at the National Geographic Society. See http://www.ice.gov/pi/nr/1003/100310washingtondc.htm According to some reports, it left the country over a century ago. See http://culturalpropertyobserver.blogspot.com/2009/03/egypt-demands-repatriation-of-coffin.html
It's understandable, but nonetheless too bad the owner of the sarcophagus merely abandoned it rather than spend the money on lawyers to fight the forfeiture in Court. It would have been interesting to see if the basis for the seizure would have stood up to judicial review.
In any event, while the AIA's "Archaeology Magazine" has reported on the repatriation, see http://www.archaeology.org/news/?p=560, as far as I know, no one associated with the archaeological community has questioned whether the repatriation will undercut any faith collectors might have in the "1970 Rule" as a some sort of safe harbor.
If so, the 1970 date may very well not be much of a "safe harbor"now that the US Government has repatriated an ancient Egyptian sarcophagus at a ceremony conducted at the National Geographic Society. See http://www.ice.gov/pi/nr/1003/100310washingtondc.htm According to some reports, it left the country over a century ago. See http://culturalpropertyobserver.blogspot.com/2009/03/egypt-demands-repatriation-of-coffin.html
It's understandable, but nonetheless too bad the owner of the sarcophagus merely abandoned it rather than spend the money on lawyers to fight the forfeiture in Court. It would have been interesting to see if the basis for the seizure would have stood up to judicial review.
In any event, while the AIA's "Archaeology Magazine" has reported on the repatriation, see http://www.archaeology.org/news/?p=560, as far as I know, no one associated with the archaeological community has questioned whether the repatriation will undercut any faith collectors might have in the "1970 Rule" as a some sort of safe harbor.
Monday, September 14, 2009
ICE and CBP Return Fossils to China
U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) have repatriated a group of fossils valued at some $30,000 to China. See: http://www.cnn.com/2009/TECH/science/09/14/china.fossils.returned/index.html?eref=igoogle_cnn See also: http://www.ice.gov/pi/nr/0909/090914washington.htm
The basis for the return is unclear. CNN quotes John Morton, an ICE official, as stating,
The attempt to remove them from China ran up against a network of national and international customs laws that are in place to protect against the theft of cultural property.
Nevertheless, I suspect that Customs may have detained the artifacts for failure to declare them properly and that the importers then abandoned them rather than fight the seizure.
This would be typical. I understand most artifacts that are repatriated are abandoned without a decision from a neutral fact finder. Contesting a customs forfeiture takes substantial time and money. Even an importer with a strong case may not consider it worth pursuing. For instance, while the fossils' estimated value of $30,000 may sound significant, that amount must be balanced against the costs of retaining a lawyer (which could easily exceed that amount), the time and effort involved, and the fear that civil customs liability may possibly lead to criminal charges. Indeed, when faced with such realities, most will consider abandonment to be the only rational option.
This all seems quite unfair to me. From my perspective, it all seems tilted too heavily in favor of the government and against the rights of an individual. Though the system offers due process, such process carries little practical meaning if the costs of exercising it are too great.
Certainly, government press releases tell only one side of the story. The importers that know the other side remain silent for fear of liability. Meanwhile, is it possible that fossils like those repatriated here are as openly available in China itself as is ancient art? See http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1656527,00.html If so, what interests do their repatriation actually serve?
The basis for the return is unclear. CNN quotes John Morton, an ICE official, as stating,
The attempt to remove them from China ran up against a network of national and international customs laws that are in place to protect against the theft of cultural property.
Nevertheless, I suspect that Customs may have detained the artifacts for failure to declare them properly and that the importers then abandoned them rather than fight the seizure.
This would be typical. I understand most artifacts that are repatriated are abandoned without a decision from a neutral fact finder. Contesting a customs forfeiture takes substantial time and money. Even an importer with a strong case may not consider it worth pursuing. For instance, while the fossils' estimated value of $30,000 may sound significant, that amount must be balanced against the costs of retaining a lawyer (which could easily exceed that amount), the time and effort involved, and the fear that civil customs liability may possibly lead to criminal charges. Indeed, when faced with such realities, most will consider abandonment to be the only rational option.
This all seems quite unfair to me. From my perspective, it all seems tilted too heavily in favor of the government and against the rights of an individual. Though the system offers due process, such process carries little practical meaning if the costs of exercising it are too great.
Certainly, government press releases tell only one side of the story. The importers that know the other side remain silent for fear of liability. Meanwhile, is it possible that fossils like those repatriated here are as openly available in China itself as is ancient art? See http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1656527,00.html If so, what interests do their repatriation actually serve?
Friday, October 3, 2008
Lara Logan of CBS News: Cultural Property Criminal?
Those who do not like Lara Logan's reporting, her politics, her personal life or, perhaps her notoriety are making a big deal about the fact that she has displayed some portraits of Saddam Hussein from Iraq in her office. Now, apparently Immigration and Customs Enforcement ("ICE") is gettting into the act. See: http://www.nypost.com/seven/10032008/gossip/pagesix/us_eye_on_logans_iraq_loot_131885.htm It is not helping Ms. Logan's cause that the Feds earlier came down hard on a Fox News engineer for smuggling similar paintings from Iraq. Apparently, questions are being raised about "double standards."
Hopefully, ICE will close the books on its investigation soon. It should be clear to anyone who has actually read the governing legislation authorizing import restrictions on Iraqi cultural artifacts that it was not really meant to apply to modern artifacts, despite the fact that the State Department Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs (("ECA") has, in its infinite wisdom, applied import restrictions to modern Iraqi art. (The governing statute, the Convention on Cultural Property Implementation Act, only provides for restrictions on archaeological objects over 250 years old and ethnological objects, which are typically not the products of modern societies.) I suppose that ICE could also be making the claim that the portraits taken from bombed out buildings were stolen "Iraqi Government Property," but before doing so, one would hope ICE agents would first search all the offices in the Pentagon and State Department to make sure no similar souvenirs are hanging on the walls.
Hopefully, ICE will close the books on its investigation soon. It should be clear to anyone who has actually read the governing legislation authorizing import restrictions on Iraqi cultural artifacts that it was not really meant to apply to modern artifacts, despite the fact that the State Department Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs (("ECA") has, in its infinite wisdom, applied import restrictions to modern Iraqi art. (The governing statute, the Convention on Cultural Property Implementation Act, only provides for restrictions on archaeological objects over 250 years old and ethnological objects, which are typically not the products of modern societies.) I suppose that ICE could also be making the claim that the portraits taken from bombed out buildings were stolen "Iraqi Government Property," but before doing so, one would hope ICE agents would first search all the offices in the Pentagon and State Department to make sure no similar souvenirs are hanging on the walls.
Tuesday, September 16, 2008
"Repatriations Back to Iraq"
The VOA has publicized the handover of antiquities that were allegedly illicitly removed from Iraq. The story can be found here: http://www.voanews.com/english/2008-09-15-voa55.cfm A somewhat more detailed piece from "The Imperial Valley News" can also be found here: http://www.imperialvalleynews.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=2709&Itemid=1
Attendees at the ceremony included John Russell, a State Department employee and archaeologist. Russell previously lobbied Congress for passage of legislation to allow the State Department to impose "emergency" import restrictions on a host of Iraqi archaeological artifacts, including ones as common as coins. For more see, http://culturalpropertyobserver.blogspot.com/2008/05/john-russell-from-activist-to-regulator.html
As the "Imperial Valley News" states,
Julie L. Myers, Assistant Secretary of Homeland Security for U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), completed the repatriation of 1,046 cultural antiquities to the Government of Iraq that were seized in four separate investigations dating back to 2001.
The items, which included terra cotta cones inscribed in Cuneiform text, a praying god figurine that was once imbedded in a Sumerian temple and coins bearing the likenesses of ancient emperors, are an illustration of the long and varied history of the country now known as Iraq. Remnants of ancient Cuneiform tablets, which were seized by the Customs Service in 2001, were recovered from beneath the ruins of the World Trade Center. [Note: They were evidently stored after being seized in a US Customs Building that was destroyed in the 9/11 attacks]
Later on in the article there are more details about the seizure of coins:
[I]n 2003, five Federal Express packages containing glass bottles, coins, copper knives, spear heads, necklaces, cylinder seals, a bronze stick and set of decorative armor were imported by another Newark, N.J., gallery. ICE New York agents determined, with the help of experts, that the items, which were originally declared to be of British origin, were all, except for the armor, from Iraq. In total, 671 items were seized (406 glass bottles, 5 bronze spear heads, 6 bronze daggers, 87 cylinder seals, 2 metal sculptures, 1 metal axe head, 120 beaded necklaces, 1 large bronze spear/sword, 10 metal daggers, 30 antique coins, 2 bronze figurines, 1 small glass plate) and determined to be from various locations throughout Iraq.
This article raises two obvious questions outside those already raised in two recent posts about Immigration and Customs Enforcement's exploits.
Most obviously, "Is that all?" I'm sure some will think that 1,046 objects is a significant number. However, that number must be judged against all the hyperbole we have heard since 2003. You know, the incessant chatter in the press and archaeological blogs that Iraqi archaeological sites have been "strip-mined" of immense numbers of artifacts with a lion's share being destined for the illicit market in the United States and Europe. At a minimum, the actual number seized in the US belies any claim that whatever may have left Iraq illicitly was destined for our shores.
Second, as someone who has collected and studied ancient coins for over 30 years, I would be quite interested to learn how "experts" were able to opine that the coins found in a FED EX package were illicitly removed from Iraq. Coins that circulated in Iraq also circulated around the Middle East (and beyond). Presumably, the coins in question could have been found in Iraq. On the other hand, they could also have been found most anywhere. And for that matter, for all I know, they could have resided in some collection for years before being seized by US Customs.
I say this for this simple fact: It is likely that much of the material that was seized and repatriated to Iraq was simply abandoned by the importer. Let's face it. The costs of hiring a lawyer to contest the seizure of items of small value like "30 antique coins" is just not worth it.
Without Customs' claims being tested in a contested adjudicatory hearing, it is at least possible that a significant number of the 1,046 items mentioned in the articles are actually being "repatriated" to a country from whence they never came!
All and all, this should be a cause for deep embarrassment for both ICE and members of the archaeological community like John Russell. Perhaps, that is why we are only hearing about this handover ceremony from the VOA and "The Imperial Valley News."
In the meantime, sources like the Art Newspaper are starting to ask hard questions about the claims of archaeological community about the extent of looting in Iraq. Hopefully, that long delayed scrutiny of the archaeological community's claims about Iraq is only beginning.
Attendees at the ceremony included John Russell, a State Department employee and archaeologist. Russell previously lobbied Congress for passage of legislation to allow the State Department to impose "emergency" import restrictions on a host of Iraqi archaeological artifacts, including ones as common as coins. For more see, http://culturalpropertyobserver.blogspot.com/2008/05/john-russell-from-activist-to-regulator.html
As the "Imperial Valley News" states,
Julie L. Myers, Assistant Secretary of Homeland Security for U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), completed the repatriation of 1,046 cultural antiquities to the Government of Iraq that were seized in four separate investigations dating back to 2001.
The items, which included terra cotta cones inscribed in Cuneiform text, a praying god figurine that was once imbedded in a Sumerian temple and coins bearing the likenesses of ancient emperors, are an illustration of the long and varied history of the country now known as Iraq. Remnants of ancient Cuneiform tablets, which were seized by the Customs Service in 2001, were recovered from beneath the ruins of the World Trade Center. [Note: They were evidently stored after being seized in a US Customs Building that was destroyed in the 9/11 attacks]
Later on in the article there are more details about the seizure of coins:
[I]n 2003, five Federal Express packages containing glass bottles, coins, copper knives, spear heads, necklaces, cylinder seals, a bronze stick and set of decorative armor were imported by another Newark, N.J., gallery. ICE New York agents determined, with the help of experts, that the items, which were originally declared to be of British origin, were all, except for the armor, from Iraq. In total, 671 items were seized (406 glass bottles, 5 bronze spear heads, 6 bronze daggers, 87 cylinder seals, 2 metal sculptures, 1 metal axe head, 120 beaded necklaces, 1 large bronze spear/sword, 10 metal daggers, 30 antique coins, 2 bronze figurines, 1 small glass plate) and determined to be from various locations throughout Iraq.
This article raises two obvious questions outside those already raised in two recent posts about Immigration and Customs Enforcement's exploits.
Most obviously, "Is that all?" I'm sure some will think that 1,046 objects is a significant number. However, that number must be judged against all the hyperbole we have heard since 2003. You know, the incessant chatter in the press and archaeological blogs that Iraqi archaeological sites have been "strip-mined" of immense numbers of artifacts with a lion's share being destined for the illicit market in the United States and Europe. At a minimum, the actual number seized in the US belies any claim that whatever may have left Iraq illicitly was destined for our shores.
Second, as someone who has collected and studied ancient coins for over 30 years, I would be quite interested to learn how "experts" were able to opine that the coins found in a FED EX package were illicitly removed from Iraq. Coins that circulated in Iraq also circulated around the Middle East (and beyond). Presumably, the coins in question could have been found in Iraq. On the other hand, they could also have been found most anywhere. And for that matter, for all I know, they could have resided in some collection for years before being seized by US Customs.
I say this for this simple fact: It is likely that much of the material that was seized and repatriated to Iraq was simply abandoned by the importer. Let's face it. The costs of hiring a lawyer to contest the seizure of items of small value like "30 antique coins" is just not worth it.
Without Customs' claims being tested in a contested adjudicatory hearing, it is at least possible that a significant number of the 1,046 items mentioned in the articles are actually being "repatriated" to a country from whence they never came!
All and all, this should be a cause for deep embarrassment for both ICE and members of the archaeological community like John Russell. Perhaps, that is why we are only hearing about this handover ceremony from the VOA and "The Imperial Valley News."
In the meantime, sources like the Art Newspaper are starting to ask hard questions about the claims of archaeological community about the extent of looting in Iraq. Hopefully, that long delayed scrutiny of the archaeological community's claims about Iraq is only beginning.
Monday, September 15, 2008
ICE Scorecard on Antiquities Seizures
The Museum Security Network has this AP Story entitled, "Antiquities Smuggling: Growing Problem at US Ports:" http://groups.google.com/group/museum-security-network/browse_thread/thread/03d93e714fcdcf4e?hl=en The article recounts recent antiquities seizures and hypes the supposed growth in antiquities smuggling.
Despite the title, overall, I suspect that the numbers cited more accurately reflect changed enforcement priorities than anything else. As was explained to me by an old Customs lawyer, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) loves these cases because of the publicity. The problem, of course, is that the quest for publicity often leads to hype that is not reflective of reality. Statements like these certainly don't help: "'A nation's culture is not for sale. These are not souvenirs to be displayed at someone's house,' said Anthony Mangione, a special agent in charge of the Miami office of the agency also known as ICE." In particular, this statement implies that collecting itself is somehow an illicit pursuit. Apparently, Agent Mangione does not know or much care that cultural artifacts have long been collected, preserved and displayed legally by Americans in their own homes for generations.
Despite the title, overall, I suspect that the numbers cited more accurately reflect changed enforcement priorities than anything else. As was explained to me by an old Customs lawyer, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) loves these cases because of the publicity. The problem, of course, is that the quest for publicity often leads to hype that is not reflective of reality. Statements like these certainly don't help: "'A nation's culture is not for sale. These are not souvenirs to be displayed at someone's house,' said Anthony Mangione, a special agent in charge of the Miami office of the agency also known as ICE." In particular, this statement implies that collecting itself is somehow an illicit pursuit. Apparently, Agent Mangione does not know or much care that cultural artifacts have long been collected, preserved and displayed legally by Americans in their own homes for generations.
Again, while no one should condone smuggling, preservation of cultural heritage would be better served if there was less hype and more of an effort to incentivize source countries to pass fairer laws akin to the UK's system of Treasure Trove. That way, any problems would be largely addressed at the source than through our criminal justice system here.
A major problem in my opinion is that ICE and other federal agencies rely far too heavily on archaeologists with an axe to grind against collectors and museums as major sources of information. Using activists as experts is patently unfair and no doubt has led the government to overreach on occasion. (See: http://www.accg.us/issues/news/old-pots-cops-paint-as-201chot201d-sold-openly-in-thailand/?searchterm=Thailand) One hopes that the new "Penn Cultural Heritage Center" will not institutionalize this problem, but that remains to be seen.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
