Autor
Palabras clave
Resumen

Cultural objects have a special, protected, status because of their intangible heritage value to people, as symbols of an identity. This has been so since the first days of international law and, today, there is an extensive legal framework to protect cultural objects and to prohibit looting. Despite this, for as long as demand exists and profits are high, cultural objects continue to be looted, smuggled and traded. At some point, their character tends to change from protected heritage in an original setting to valuable art and commodity in the hands of new possessors. In this new setting, the legal status of such objects most likely will be a matter of ownership and the private law regime in the country where they happen to end up. 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.

Año de publicación
2020
Revista académica
Netherlands International Law Review
Volumen
67
Número
2
Número de páginas
257-295
Fecha de publicación
sep
Numero ISSN
0165-070X
DOI
10.1007/s40802-020-00174-3
Descargar cita