تأملی در حل‌وفصل اختلافات راجع به اموال فرهنگی

نوع مقاله: علمی - ترویجی

نویسنده

پژوهشگر حقوق بین‌الملل و مدرس دانشگاه

چکیده

اهمیت و جایگاه اموال و اشیاء فرهنگی در تاریخ تمدن بشریت غیرقابل انکار است. این جایگاه در حقوق بین‌الملل معاصر به حدی برجسته و درخور تأمل شده که اگر در رویکردهای کلاسیک این اموال متعلق به یک دولت خاص و لذا تحت مالکیت و حفاظت آن دولت محسوب می‌شدند، امروزه با رویکردهای نسبتاً‌ مدرن متعلق به کل بشریت و میراثی مشترک تلقی می‌گردند. با این وصف هرچه ارزش و اعتبار این قبیل اموال نمایان‌تر شود، سرقت، ‌جابه‌جایی غیرقانونی و حتی گاهی چپاول این اموال و در نتیجه اختلافات حادث در خصوص نگهداری و مالکیت چنین اشیائی بیشتر خودنمایی خواهد کرد. در این مقاله به اختصار به سازوکارهای حل‌وفصل اختلافات و راهکارهای مناسب آن خواهیم پرداخت.

کلیدواژه‌ها


عنوان مقاله [English]

Examining Various Mechanisms for International Disputes over Cultural Properties

نویسنده [English]

  • Aramesh Shahbazi
چکیده [English]

Disputes regarding cultural properties are so common in international relations. However despite the frequency of cultural properly dispute; there is currently no permanent and universally accepted framework for their resolution. While the most cultural disputes are international, they implicates a variety of legal norms and raises complex choice of legal questions such as conflicting evidentiary standards of proceeding and statutes of limitations. In this article we will analysis the various classic and modern dispute resolution mechanisms and will examine the best alternative ways by taking a look at the practice of the states.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Cultural properties
  • Possession
  • ownership
  • Dispute Resolution
  • Alternative mechanisms

شهبازی، آرامش، «‌مالکیت منشور کوروش در حقوق بین‌الملل»، مقاله پذیرفته شده در همـایش ملی حمـایت از اموال فرهنگی و تاریخی در حقوق بین‌الملل، همدان، دانشگاه بوعلی، 19 و 20 مهر 1390.

Altmann Maria V., Francis Gutmann, Trevor Mantle, George Bentley v. the Republic of Austria, arbitral award of May 7, 2006.

http://bslaw.com/altmann/Zuckerkandl/Decisions/decision.pdf.

Autonomie Juridique. Doctoral thesis defended at the University of Limoges, December 7, 2005. Cited in Marie Cornu, New Developments in the Restitution of Cultural Property: Alternative Means of Dispute Resolution, International Journal of Cultural Property (2010) 17:1–31.

Bitterman Amy, Settling Cultural Property Disputes, 19 Villanova Sports and Entertainment Law Journal (2012).

Borodkin Lisa J., The Economics of Antiquities Looting and a Proposed Legal Alternative, 95 Col. L. Rev. 377,(1995).

Code of Ethics, sec. 7 (2006), available at http://icom.museum/fileadmin/user_upload/pdf/Codes/code2006_eng.pdf.

Convention for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict -- 1954, UNESCO (last updated Nov. 24, 2008, 3:02 PM), http://portal.unesco.org/culture/en/ev.php-URL_ID=35744&URL_DO=DO_TOPIC&URL_SECTION=201.html (07.05.2012).

Convention for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict, art. 3, May 14, 1954, 249 U.N.T.S. 215, available at http://portal.unesco.org/en/ev.php-URL_ID=13637&URL_DO=DO_TOPIC&URL_SECTION=201.html.

Convention on the Means of Prohibiting and Preventing the Illicit Import, Export and Transfer of Ownership of Cultural Property, Nov. 14, 1970, 823 U.N.T.S. 231, available at http://portal.unesco.org/en/ev.php-URL_ID=13039&URL_DO=DO_TOPIC&URL_SECTION=201.html (05. 04. 2012).

Draft Rules of Procedure on Mediation and Conciliation adopted at the last Committee meeting in June 2007. http://unesdoc.unesco.org/ images/0015/001509/150913e.pdf.(03.04.2012)

Hayworth Andrea E., Stolen Artwork: Deciding Ownership is No Pretty Pictures, 43 Duke L.J.(1993).

Honan William H., U.S. Returns Stolen Ancient Textiles to Bolivia, N.Y. Times, Sept. 27, 1992.

Mackenzie M., Going, Going, Gone: Regulating the Market in Illicit Antiquities, Leicester, Institute of Art and Law, (2005), pp. 157-191, Also see http://www.mcdonald.cam.ac.uk/projects/iarc/culturewithoutcontext/issue18/gerstenblith_mackenzie_review.htm.

Memorandum of Understanding between the Government of Peru and Yale University 1 (Sept. 14, 2007), available at http://opa.yale.edu/opa/mpi/Machu-Picchu-MOU.pdf .

Merryman John Henry, Two Ways of Thinking about Cultural Property, 80 American Journal of International Law 831 (1986), available at http://www.asil.org/ajil/v80831.pdf.

Perrot, X. De la Restitution Internationale des Biens Culturels aux XIXème et XXème Siècles: Vers une.

Povoledo Elisabetta, Italy Presses Its Fight for a Statue at the Getty, N.Y. TIMES, Jan. 15, 2010. http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/16/arts/design/16bronze.html.

Promote the return or the restitution of cultural property: Committee—Fund—UNESCO Conventions,” available at UNESCO web site: http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0013/001394/139407eb.pdf.

Prott, Commentaire relatif à la convention Unidroit, Paris: UNESCO, 2000.p.

Raghavan, T. E. S. "Zero-sum two-person games". In Aumann; Hart. Handbook of Game Theory Amsterdam: Elsevier. pp. (1994).

Resolution 20 C4/ 7.6/5, Records of the General Conference, 20th session, Paris, October 24–November 28, 1978, p. 97.

Resolution of Cultural Property Disputes, (The Int'l Bureau of the Permanent Court of Arbitration ed., Kluwer International 2004).

Resolution of the Institute de Droit International, Bassel Session (1991), available at http://www.idi-iil.org/idiE/resolutionsE/1991_bal_04_en.PDF.

Schneider Marina, UNIDROIT Convention on Stolen or Illegally Exported Cultural Objects: Explanatory Report, Unif. L. Rev. 2001-3, 476, 478 (2001), available at http://www.unidroit.org/english/conventions/1995culturalproperty/1995culturalproperty -explanatoryreport-e.pdf.

statutes of the Intergovernmental Committee for Promoting the Return of Cultural Property to Its Countries of Origin or Its Restitution in Case of Unlawful Appropriation of November 28, 1978.

Sutton Byrne and Geisinger-Mariéthoz (Eds.), Resolution Mechanisms for Art-Related Disputes.

Sydney M. Drum, DeWeerth v. Baldinger: Making New York a Haven for Stolen Art?, 64 N.Y.U. L. Rev. 909, 910 n.12 (1989)

The 1995 UNIDROIT Convention, CINOA, http://www.cinoa.org/page/2298.

The agreement between the Metropolitan Museum of Art of New York and Italy, dated February 21, 2006. Available at http://www.metmuseum.org/about-the-museum/press-room/news/2006/statement-by-the-metropolitan-museum-of-art-on-its-agreement-with-italian-ministry-of-culture.

the statement made in January 2006 by the ICOM president, http://icom.museum/statement_mediation_eng.html and the June 2005 report of the ICOM Legal Affairs and Properties Committee, http://icom.museum/download/68/doc-eng.doc/2005LEG06-eng.pdf.(07.07.2012).

UNESCO Convention on the Means of Prohibiting and Preventing the Illicit Import, Export and Transfer of Ownership of Cultural Property.

UNESCO Convention on the Means of Prohibiting and Preventing the Illicit Import, Export and Transfer of Ownership of Cultural Property, op.cit; also see Council Directive 93/7/EEC of March 15, 1993.

Working document for discussion on a strategy to facilitate the restitution of stolen or unlawfully exported cultural property, Thirteenth Session, UNESCO, Paris, February 7–10, 2005,CLT-2005/CONF.202/4.