A proteção do patrimônio cultural em novas perspectivas: estudo comparado entre a Kulturgutschutzgesetz e a Holocaust Expropriated Art Recovery Act of 2016

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.5102/rdi.v17i3.7392

Keywords:

bens culturais, patrimônio cultural, Kulturgutschutzgesetz, HEAR

Abstract

Este estudo tem como objetivo analisar a proteção de bens culturais tomando como referências duas normas nacionais, a alemã Kulturgutschutzgesetz – KGSG e a norte americana Holocaust Expropriated Art Recovery Act of 2016 – HEAR. Para alcançar este objetivo, utilizar-se-á a metodologia comparativa de normas legislativas, além do diálogo destas com outras normas internacionais sobre o tema. Utilizou-se, para um melhor desenvolvimento do tema, de fontes bibliográficas e legislativas. Na primeira parte, apresenta-se o contexto dos bens culturais e sua necessidade de proteção. Em seguida, apresenta-se aspectos de proximidade e diferenças entre as duas supramencionadas normas nacionais, com especial atenção aos aspectos temporais das normas.

Author Biography

  • Ardyllis Alves Soares, Programa de Mestrado e Doutorado em Direito. Centro Universitário de Brasília - CEUB. Instituto de Direito. Universidade Estatal de Ural do Sul - SUSU, Rússia.
    Pós-Doutorando no Centro Universitário de Brasília - CEUB e Research Advisor da Universidade Estatal do Ural do Sul - Rússia. Doutor e Mestre em Direito pela UFRGS, com estágio doutoral na Justus-Liebig-Universität Giessen - Alemanha. Especialista em Direito Internacional pela UFRGS e em Direito Empresarial pelo IBMEC/RJ. Diplôme d'Université em Direito Europeu e Francês dos Contratos pela Université de Savoie - França. Consultor Jurídico do Ministério da Justiça, contratado pelo PNUD. Advogado.

References

BARNES, Jason. Holocaust Expropriated Art Recovery (HEAR) Act of 2016: a federal reform to state statutes of limitations for art restitution claims. Columbia Journal of Transnational Law, v. 56, n. 3, 2018. p. 593-635.

BLAKE, Janet. Cultural Heritage Law: contextual issues. In: BLAKE, Janet (org.). International Cultural Heritage Law. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2015. p. 1-22.

CAMPFENS, Evelien. Restitution of looted art: what about access to justice? Santander Art and Culture Law Review, v. 4, n. 2, 2018. p. 185-220.

________. Whose Cultural Objects? Introducing Heritage Title for Cross-Border Cultural Property Claims. Netherlands International Law Review, v. 67, n. 2, 2020. p. 257-295.

CZERNIK, Ilja. § 32. In: ELMENHORST, Lucas; WIESE, Volker (org.). Kulturgutschutzgesetz. München: C.H. Beck, 2018. p. 213-219.

DREIER, Thomas; KEMLE, Nicolai B.; WELLER, Matthias (org.). Kunst und Recht - Rückblick, Gegenwart und Zukunft. Baden Baden: Nomos, 2017.

ELMENHORST, Lucas; WIESE, Volker. Kulturgutschutzgesetz. In: ELMENHORST, Lucas; WIESE, Volker (org.). Kulturgutschutzgesetz. München: C.H. Beck, 2018.

FRANKEL, Simon J. The HEAR Act and laches after three years. North Carolina Journal of International Law and Commercial Regulation, v. 45, n. 2, 2020. p. 441-456.

________; SHARONI, Sari. Navigating the ambiguities and uncertainties of the Holocaust Expropriated Art Recovery Act of 2016. Columbia Journal of Law & the Arts, v. 42, n. 2, 2019. p. 157-187.

FRIGO, Manlio. Circulation des biens culturels, détermination de la loi applicable et méthodes de règlement de litiges. Recueil des Cours: collected courses of The Hague Academy of International Law. Kluwer Law International: Hague, 2016. v. 375. p. 89-474.

GERSTENBLITH, Patty. Statutes of limitation and other legal challenges to the recovery of stolen art. In: HUFNAGEL, Saskia; CHAPPELL, Duncan (org.). The palgrave handbook on art crime. London: Palgrave Macmillan, 2019. p. 271-285.

GRAY, Soffia H. Kuehner. The Holocaust Expropriated Art Recovery Act of 2016: an innefective remedy for return in nazi-looted art. University of Illinois Law Review, n. 1, 2019. p. 363-399.

HAUSLER, Kristin. Cultural heritage and the Security Council: Why Resolution 2347 matters. Question de Droit International - zoom in, n. 48, 2018. p. 5-19.

HEIMANN, Hans Markus. § 2. In: ELMENHORST, Lucas; WIESE, Volker (org.). Kulturgutschutzgesetz. München: C.H. Beck, 2018. p. 30-36.

HUFNAGEL, Saskia; CHAPPELL, Duncan (org.). The palgrave handbook on art crime. London: Palgrave Macmillan, 2019.

JAYME; Erik. Die verschwiegene Provenienz: Der Heidelberger Trübner-Fall und die Auslegung des § 40 KGSG. In: WELLER, Matthias; KEMLE, Nicolai B.; DREIER, Thomas (org.). Handel - Provenienz - Restitution. Baden Baden: Nomos, 2020. p. 6-19.

________. Nationale Kunst heute – Betrachtungen zum neuen Kulturgutschutzgesetz. In: DREIER, Thomas; KEMLE, Nicolai B.; WELLER, Matthias (org.). Kunst und Recht - Rückblick, Gegenwart und Zukunft. Baden Baden: Nomos, 2017. p. 71-102.

________. Narrative norms in private international law: the example of Art Law. Recueil des Cours: collected courses of The Hague Academy of International Law. Kluwer Law International: Hague, 2016. v. 375. p. 9-52.

________. Identité culturelle et intégration: Le droit international privé postmoderne: cours général de droit international privé. Recueil des Cours: collected courses of The Hague Academy of International Law. Kluwer Law International: Hague, 1995. v. 251. p. 9-267.

KREDER, Jennifer Anglim. Analysis of the Holocaust Expropriated Art Recovery Act of 2016. Chapman Law Review, v. 20, n. 1, 2017. p. 1-24.

MAGRI, Geo. Directive 2014/60/EU and Its Effects on the European Art Market. Santander Art and Culture Law Review, v. 2, n. 2, 2016. p. 195-210.

MARTINEAU, Anne-Katel. Droit du marché de l’art. Issy-les-Moulineaux: Gualino, 2018.

MIGLIO, Alberto. La restituzione dei beni culturali nell’Unione Europea: dalla Direttiva 93/7 alla Direttiva 2014/60, tra mercato interno e competenza esterna dell’Unione. Diritto del Commercio Internazionale, v. XXX, n. 4, 2016. p. 863-884.

NAHLIK, Stanislaw E.. La protection internationale des biens culturels en cas de conflit armé. Recueil des Cours: collected courses of The Hague Academy of International Law. Kluwer Law International: Hague, 1967. v. 120. p. 61-163.

O’KEEFE, Roger. The protection of cultural property in armed conflict. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006.

PETERS, Robert. The protection of cultural property: recent developments in Germany in the context of new EU Law and the 1970 UNESCO Convention. Santander Art and Culture Law Review, v. 2, n. 2, 2016. p. 85-102.

RUFFINI, Francesco. De la protection internationale des droits sur les oeuvres littéraires et artistiques. Recueil des Cours: collected courses of The Hague Academy of International Law. Kluwer Law International: Hague, 1926. v. 12. p. 387-597.

SCHACK, Haimo. Zivilrechtliche Auswirkungen des KGSG: Importverbote und Transparenzpflichten. In: WELLER, Matthias; KEMLE, Nicolai B.; DREIER, Thomas (org.). Handel - Provenienz - Restitution. Baden Baden: Nomos, 2020. p. 73-88.

SCOVAZZI, Tullio. Culture. In: CHESTERMAN, Simon et al. (org.). The Oxford Handbook of United Nations treaties. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2019. p. 307-320.

SYMEONIDES, Symeon C. Choice of law in the American courts in 2018: thirty-second annual survey. The American Journal of Comparative Law, v. 67, n. 1, 2019. p. 1-97.

TAȘDELEN, Alper. The return of cultural artefacts: hard and soft law approaches. Cham: Springer, 2016.

TURP, Daniel. La contribution du droit international au maintien de la diversité culturelle. Recueil des Cours: collected courses of The Hague Academy of International Law. Kluwer Law International: Hague, 2015. v. 363. p. 333-454.

WELLER, Matthias. Rethinking EU Cultural Property Law: towards private enforcement. Baden Baden: Nomos, 2018.

________; KEMLE, Nicolai B.; DREIER, Thomas (org.). Handel - Provenienz - Restitution. Baden Baden: Nomos, 2020.

WIELING, Hans Josef; FINKENAUER, Thomas. Sachenrecht. 6. ed. Berlin: Springer, 2020.

WIESE, Volker. § 52. In: ELMENHORST, Lucas; WIESE, Volker (org.). Kulturgutschutzgesetz. München: C.H. Beck, 2018. p. 335-349.

________. § 53. In: ELMENHORST, Lucas; WIESE, Volker (org.). Kulturgutschutzgesetz. München: C.H. Beck, 2018. p. 349-353.

ZEIDLER, Kamil. Restitution of cultural property: hard cases, theory of argumentation, philosophy of law. Gdańsk: Wolters Kluwer, 2016.

Downloads

Published

2021-04-20

Issue

Vol. 17 No. 3 (2020): Art Law and Cultural Heritage Law / Direito da Arte e do Patrimônio Cultural

Section

Aspectos Metodológicos Do Direito da Arte e do Patrimônio Cultural

License

Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:

a) Authors retain copyright over their work and grant the journal the right of first publication, with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0), which allows others to share the work with acknowledgement of the work's authorship and its initial publication in this journal.

b) Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.

c) Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their personal website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work.

How to Cite

A proteção do patrimônio cultural em novas perspectivas: estudo comparado entre a Kulturgutschutzgesetz e a Holocaust Expropriated Art Recovery Act of 2016. (2021). Brazilian Journal of International Law, 17(3). https://doi.org/10.5102/rdi.v17i3.7392