WRITTEN QUESTION E-1525/03 by Erik Meijer (GUE/NGL) to the Commission. Privatisation of art treasures as a result of widespread thefts from museums and inadequate checks on the international art trade.
Date: 2003-05-06
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: EU police cooperation, Europol, Interpol, Netherlands, art trade, database, exchange of information, fight against crime, illicit trade

C 84 E/726

Official Journal of the European Union

EN

3.4.2004

(2004/C 84 E/0816)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-1510/03

by Franz Turchi (UEN) to the Commission

(28 April 2003)

Subject: Direct financial assistance to the Palestine National Authority

Since June 2001 the Commission has been providing financial support for the Palestine National Authority
in the form of direct payments of around 10 million euro per month. Will the Commission say if and
when, and under what circumstances and on what grounds, these payments have been suspended?

Answer given by Mr Patten on behalf of the Commission

(3 June 2003)

The Honourable Member is asked to refer to the Commission’s answer to written question P-1437/03 by
Mr Laschet (1).

(1) See page 723.

(2004/C 84 E/0817)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1525/03

by Erik Meijer (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(6 May 2003)

Subject: Privatisation of art treasures as a result of widespread thefts from museums and inadequate checks

on the international art trade

1.
Is the Commission aware of the growing number of large-scale thefts in the past few years of art
works exhibited or stored in museums, such as paintings by famous artists in the Netherlands and artefacts
from archaeological sites in Iraq which are thousands of years old?

2.
Is the registration of stolen works of art, which prevents the objects from being traded openly
between EU Member States, restricted to selective administration for instance by members of ‘Artloss’,
which means that in practice it remains largely unclear what art works being traded are stolen, or is there
a comprehensive central registration system managed by Europol or Interpol that can make such a trade
impossible?

Does the Netherlands now occupy an exceptional position in the trade in stolen art so that in
3.
practice its role as an international centre for the art trade is supported by inadequate policing capacity,
which merely registers but does not investigate, and by failure to comply with international agreements
and the fact that purchasers of stolen art works are entitled to become the legal owners after 21 years?

4.
Does the Commission share the fear that the illegal privatisation of art which has been collected for
the public with public money cannot be prevented in a Europe with open frontiers without strong counter
measures in the area of checks, investigation and punishment?

5.
Does the Commission consider that further action is required to prevent, or at least reduce far as
possible, the trade in stolen art? What measures can be expected from the Commission in the near future
in this sphere?

Source: Netherlands 3 TV channel, Zembla programme, 17 April 2002.

3.4.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 84 E/727

Answer given by Mr Vitorino on behalf of the Commission

(18 July 2003)

The Commission is deeply concerned at the extent of the theft of, and illicit trafficking in, cultural objects.
It deplores in particular the recent looting of the cultural heritage of Iraq. Particular measures concerning
cultural objects originating in Iraq are being considered as part of the implementation of Security Council
Resolution 1483.

The possibility of a central database, or network of databases, of stolen cultural goods at European level is
currently under consideration by a working group established by Europol. The possibility of including
works of art within the future SIS II (second-generation Schengen Information System) will also have to be
carefully considered. Details of the database run by Interpol may be found on its website: (www.inter-
pol.com.)

As regards the policing practices and laws of the Netherlands in comparison with other Member States, the
Commission is not currently in a position to comment.

The Commission appreciates the need for measures to protect cultural goods. Regulation No 3911/92/
EEC (1), on the export of cultural goods, subjects the export of cultural goods outside the customs territory
of the Community to the presentation of an export licence. In addition, Directive 93/7/EEC (2), on the
return of cultural objects unlawfully removed from the territory of a Member State, provides for
cooperation mechanisms between Member States and a procedure for returning national treasures when
these have left the territory of a Member State unlawfully.

Recently the Commission has intensified efforts to improve measures to combat illicit trafficking in
the second
cultural goods. As part of the European Forum on the prevention of organised crime,
workshop on the prevention of illicit trafficking in cultural goods was organised by the Commission in
Brussels on 9 December 2002. Over one hundred people took part, representing a wide variety of
interests: owners, institutions (ministries, international organisations, the Commission, Unesco, Unidroit,
Europol, Interpol, etc), police forces and customs authorities,
insurers, collectors, art dealers and their
associations, intermediaries and private organisations. One of the recommendations of that workshop was
to create the Europol working group referred to above to consider the possibility of a European database,
or network of existing databases, of stolen cultural goods. A third workshop is planned for later this year.

The Advisory Committee on Cultural Goods, created within the framework of Regulation No 3911/92, has
recently issued ‘Guidelines for Administrative Co-operation between the competent authorities’ to assist in
the protection of cultural goods in the Community. Also the Commission is considering a project to
develop a website to assist in the rapid exchange of information concerning the movement of cultural
goods. In addition, a call for tenders for a study concerning the traceability of cultural goods has been
launched by the Commission on 4 June 2003.

(1) OJ L 395, 31.12.1992. Amended by Regulation No 2469/96, OJ L 335, 24.12.1996, p. 9; and Regulation No 974/

2001, OJ L 137, 19.5.2001.

(2) OJ L 74, 27.3.1993. Amended by Directive 96/100/EC of the Parliament and of the Council, OJ L 60, 1.3.1997 and

Directive 2001/38/EC of the Parliament and of the Council, OJ L 187, 10.7.2001.

(2004/C 84 E/0818)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-1939/03

by Giles Chichester (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(13 June 2003)

Subject: Commission quarterly briefings and Small Business Europe: the participation of government-

funded national bodies in Commission briefings

Is the Commission aware that the organisation known as ‘Small Business Europe’, which purports to
represent all small businesses in the UK, is in fact a body created by the UK Labour Government, funded
from tax payers money, with no mandate from actual small businesses and wholly unrepresentative of the
sector? Could the Commission indicate how many government-funded and government funded national