Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-xbtfd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-05T10:45:26.016Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Alternative Dispute Resolution and Insights on Cases of Greek Cultural Property: The J.P. Getty Case, the Leon Levy and Shelby White Case, and the Parthenon Marbles Case

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 December 2016

Irini Stamatoudi
Irini Stamatoudi*
Affiliation:
Director of the Hellenic Copyright Organization, Hellenic Ministry of Culture and Sports, Athens, Greece; Email: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract:

This article examines the pros and cons of alternative dispute resolution (ADR). It also examines two cases in which Greek cultural treasures were returned to their country of origin by a US museum and a US collector on the basis of negotiations: the J.P. Getty Museum and the Leon Levy and Shelby White cases respectively. The Parthenon Marbles case is also examined, especially in light of the UN Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization’s recent (2013) invitation to the United Kingdom (UK) to accept mediation on the matter and the UK’s even more recent (2015) rejection of the invitation. In all three cases, the facts are set out and the author attempts an assessment of the ADR means used. Conclusions are drawn as to whether ADR is a feasible and beneficial option for the parties and whether, nowadays, it constitutes the norm in cases when cultural treasures are returned to their countries of origin.

Type
Research Article
Information
International Journal of Cultural Property , Volume 23 , Special Issue 4: SPECIAL ISSUE: Alternative Dispute Resolution in Cultural Property Disputes: Merging Theory and Practice , November 2016 , pp. 433 - 457
Copyright
Copyright © International Cultural Property Society 2016 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Bessios, Matthew. 1987. “Excavations in North Pieria.” Journal Archaeologiko Ergo Makedonias Thrakis 1: 209–13.Google Scholar
Boardman, George. 1985. The Parthenon and Its Sculptures. Austin: University of Texas Press.Google Scholar
Brodie, Neil. 2012. “Marion True.” http://traffickingculture.org/case_note/marion-true/ (accessed ).Google Scholar
Collier, John, and Lowe, Vaughan. 1999. The Settlement of Disputes in International Law: Institutions and Procedures. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Dally, W. Brooks. 2006. “Arbitration of International Cultural Property Disputes: The Experience and Initiatives of the Permanent Court of Arbitration.” In Art and Cultural Heritage: Law, Policy and Practice, edited by Hoffman, B. T., 465–74. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Demakopoulou, Kaiti, and Divari-Valakou, Nikoleta. 1997. The Aidonia Treasure. Athens: Greek Ministry of Culture, Archaeological Receipts Fund.Google Scholar
Despinis, George. 1991–92. “Funerary Stele from Porto Rafti: Restoration and Comments.” Egnatia 3: 7.Google Scholar
Greenfield, Jeanette. 1989. The Return of Cultural Treasures. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Hitchens, Christopher. 2008. The Parthenon Marbles: The Case for Reunification, revised ed. London: Verso.Google Scholar
Jenkins, Tiffany. 2016. Keeping Their Marbles: How the Treasures of the Past Ended Up in Museums—And Why They Should Stay There. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
King, Dorothy. 2006. The Elgin Marbles: The Story of the Parthenon and Archaeology’s Greatest Controversy. London: Hutchinson.Google Scholar
Korka, Elena. 2009. The Parthenon Marbles. PhD dissertation, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Athens.Google Scholar
Kurzweil, Harvey, Gagion, Leon, and De Walden, Ludovic. 2005. “The Trial of the Sevso Treasure.” In Who Owns the Past? Cultural Policy, Cultural Property and the Law, edited by Gibbon, K. F., 83. New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press.Google Scholar
Meyer, Karl. 1973. The Plundered Past. The Story of the Illegal International Traffic in Works of Art. New York: Athenaeum.Google Scholar
Palmer, Norman. 2003. “Litigation, the Best Remedy?” In Resolution of Cultural Property Disputes, Permanent Court of Arbitration/Peace Palace Papers, 265–83. Alphen aan den Rijn: Kluwer Law International.Google Scholar
Stamatoudi, Irini. 1997. “The Law and the Ethics deriving from the Parthenon Marbles Case.” Web Journal of Current Legal Issues 3: 12–25.Google Scholar
Stamatoudi, Irini. 1998. “The National Treasures Exception in Article 36 EC: How Many of Them Fit the Bill?,” Art, Antiquity and Law 3: 39–51.Google Scholar
Stamatoudi, Irini. 2000. “Restitution of Stolen and Illegally Exported Cultural Objects in the Context of the UNIDROIT Convention 1995.” In The Enlarged Europe of the New Millennium, edited by Torremans, P., 109–42. Alphen aan den Rijn: Kluwer Law International.Google Scholar
Stamatoudi, Irini. 2002. “Legal Grounds for the Return of the Parthenon Marbles.” Revue Hellénique de droit International 2: 513–30.Google Scholar
Stamatoudi, Irini. 2003. “National Cultural Treasures and the Free Movement of Goods in the Single Market.” In Cultural Heritage and the Law, edited by Trova, E., 260–82. Athens: Sakkoulas Publications.Google Scholar
Stamatoudi, Irini. 2004a. “The Protection of Intangible Property by Means of the UNESCO Convention on the Safeguarding of Intangible Heritage and Intellectual Property Law.” Revue Hellénique de droit International 57: 149–62.Google Scholar
Stamatoudi, Irini. 2004b. “Legal Issues Associated with the Return of the Parthenon Marbles.” In Ο Παρθενώνας. Η Επιστροφή των Γλυπτών (Parthenon: The Return of the Marbles) , edited by Marouli-Zilemenou, M., 214–27. Athens: I. Sideris.Google Scholar
Stamatoudi, Irini. 2008. “Ο ρόλος του νομικού στη διεκδίκηση αρχαιοτήτων που έχουν παράνομα ανασκαφεί ή εξαχθεί από τη χώρα” (“The Lawyer’s Role in Requests for Return of Cultural Objects Which Have Been Illegally Excavated or Illegally Exported”). In The Protection of Cultural Treasures from Illegal Movement and Claims for Repatriation, Conference Papers New Acropolis Museum, 127–31 Athens: Greek Ministry of Culture.Google Scholar
Stamatoudi, Irini. 2009. “Mediation and Cultural Diplomacy.” Museum International (May): 116–20.Google Scholar
Stamatoudi, Irini. 2011a. “Current Trends and Principles in Cultural Property Law.” In Protection and Return of Cultural Goods, edited by Samara-Krispi, A., 149–66. Athens: Krispis Publications and Sakkoulas Publications.Google Scholar
Stamatoudi, Irini. 2011b. Cultural Property Law and Restitution: A Commentary to International Conventions and European Union Law. New York: Edward Elgar Publishing.Google Scholar
Stamatoudi, Irini, and Korka, Eleni, 2014. “The Parthenon Marbles Issue: Legal, Ethical and Political Issues.” In Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference of Experts on the Return of Cultural property, 37–44. Athens: Hellenic Ministry of Culture and Sports.Google Scholar
St Clair, William. 1998. Lord Elgin and the Marbles: The Controversial History of the Parthenon Sculptures, 3rd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Von Bothmer, Dietrich, ed. 1990. Glories of the Past: Ancient Art from the Shelby White and Leon Levy Collection. New York: Metropolitan Museum Publication.Google Scholar
Watson, Peter and Todeschini, Cecilia. 2007. The Medici Conspiracy: The Illicit Journey of Looted Antiquities from Italy’s Tomb Raiders to the World’s Greatest Museums. New York: Public Affairs.Google Scholar
Williams, Dyfri, 2009. “Lord Elgin’s Firman.” Journal of History Collections 21, no. 1: 49–76. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar