France. It’s summer surprise. Seven years after the delivery of the very controversial Sarr-Savoy report and two years after the proposals of Jean-Luc Martinez, the Ministry of Culture presented during the last Council of Ministers (July 27) before the summer break, the second version of its bill “relating to the restitution of cultural goods from states which, due to an illicit appropriation, were deprived of it”.
The title of the bill carefully avoids any reference to the French colonial empire and generalizes the beneficiary states in the five continents and not simply in Africa. A way for the Minister to dismiss any presupposition of repentance which bristles a large majority of parliamentarians and French.
The principle of this framework law, the objective of which is to no longer vote a specific law for each outing of cultural good, as was the case in 2020 for Benin and Senegal and very recently for Côte d’Ivoire, largely takes up the proposals of the ex-president-director of the Louvre, who welcomes the Journal des Arts of this “ considerable advance for the implementation of a reasoned return policy ”. It is a question of set up criteria making it possible to assess the admissibility of a request and then the returnability of goods. If the investigation of the request concludes favorably, the release of the public domain may be pronounced by the Council of State and no longer by the Parliament.
Between 1815 and 1972
The geographic field concerning the whole world, the text fixes a chronological terminal post quem To avoid opening the Pandora’s box too much of the restitutions: June 1815 corresponding to the Vienna Congress which allowed the victorious powers to recover the works carried under the Revolution and the Empire. A terminal that senator Pierre Ouzoulias finds “Aberrant” :: “There were“ collection ”of cultural goods before 1815, especially in the two Americas and in Oceania. There is no reason to exclude them from the restitutions. »»
The terminal Ante Quem is on April 23, 1972, the day before the date of entry into force in certain countries of the UNESCO Convention but not in France where it was ratified until 1997. An all theoretical date, since as the Council of State recalls, the application decree allowing to obtain the exit of public collections by the judicial path for works “removed after 1997” was never published! “157 years old is a lot”notes the lawyer Yves-Bernard Debie, a proud of any regulations on the restitutions (“This bill is a summary of everything you should not do, he explains, especially when no prescription is provided ”).
The lawyer also stigmatizes the criteria for the admissibility of the request by the State concerned and the reputable criteria. Nine in the Martinez report, there are only three of them in the law, the most important of which: “(An object) of which it is established or of which serious, precise and concordant clues are presumed that it has been the subject (…) of an illicit appropriation, by theft, looting, assignment or liberality obtained by constraint or violence or of a person who could not dispose of it. »» The lawyer points “the vagueness of” the illicity “”: “Contrary to illegality, which is based on a rule of law, the illegal introduces a moral criterion. We can return a work simply because we judge its immoral acquisition today. But what morality are we talking about? »» An argument rejected by Jean-Luc Martinez: “ This is not morale: French military instructions such as the various agreements between France and certain countries provided a clear framework which goes beyond the sole question of legality. »» The text makes an exception for certain archaeological and military goods.
The parliamentary battle should however focus on the investigation of demand. The text envisages the possibility of a scientific committee, but it is optional and its opinion is only advisory. “” Past experiences show that it is not possible to trust the government to ensure the transparent management of these files ”Ton Pierre Ouzoulias which pleads for a permanent commission “Who would ensure the duration of continuity of processing files by constituting a case law”. The senator makes it a blocking point: “ Personally, I will not vote the text without a sustainable commission and I do not believe to advance a lot by saying that this opinion will be the majority within the Commission. »»
The debates should also relate to the works entered into public collections by donations and legacies, especially since the Minister has in addition to an opinion from the Council of State exposing to a censorship of the Constitutional Council. The problem concerns uncounted liberalities of alienability prohibition clause. The text is considering this case, if at the end of a period, the beneficiaries of donors have not expressed themselves, the work can be out of the collections. The Council of State asks him that any renunciation of maintenance in public collections is express.
As with many bills, the government has initiated the accelerated procedure, it will be discussed in the Senate during the extraordinary session on September 24. “This forced the rapporteur, Catherine Morin-Desailly, to organize auditions in July and August”, complains Pierre Ouzoulias, regretting the working method implemented by former Minister Rima Abdul Malak on the first two framework laws.
