The Goodwill and Consistency of Türkiye in the Repatriation of Foreign Cultural Property: Case Studies of China and Iraq

Abstract

There are many national and international legal frameworks for the protection of cultural property. However, even though states enact laws to protect cultural property, ratify multilateral conventions, and adopt bilateral agreements, the illicit trade in cultural property remains a problem. The return of any cultural property is a multi-layered process, and it is critical that a state’s policy towards displaced cultural property is consistent and based on goodwill to ensure international protection of cultural properties. This article elaborates on Türkiye’s goodwill and consistency in returning foreign cultural property to its country of origin. Two repatriation cases are examined to assess how Türkiye applies the principles of the 1970 UNESCO Convention and the bilateral agreements done accordingly regarding goodwill and consistency. The first case is, the Republic of Türkiye & the People’s Republic of China where the return was based on a bilateral agreement while the second case is the Republic of Türkiye & the Republic of Iraq where the repatriation took place based on diplomatic relations.

Keywords

• CULTURAL DIPLOMACY
• CULTURAL PROPERTY
• GOODWILL
• ILLICIT TRAFFICKING
• REPATRIATION

Yabancı Kökenli Kültür Varlıklarının İadesinde Türkiye'nin İyi Niyeti ve Tutarlı Yaklaşımı: Çin ve Irak Örneği

Öz

Kültürel varlıkların korunması ile ilgili birçok ulusal ve uluslararası yasal çerçeve vardır. Ancak, devletlerin kültürel varlıkları korumak için yasalar çıkarmasına, çok taraflı sözleşmeleri onaylamasına ve ikili anlaşmaları kabul etmesine rağmen, kültürel varlıkların yasa dışı ticareti hala devam eden bir sorundur. Herhangi bir kültür varlığının iadesi çok katmanlı bir süreçtir ki bir devletin yerinden edilmiş kültürel varlıklara yönelik politikasının da bu nesnelerin uluslararası ölçekte korunmasını sağlamak için tutarlı ve iyi niyete dayalı olması kritik öneme sahiptir. Bu makale, Türkiye’nin yabancı kültür varlıklarını kaynak ülkesine iade etmedeki iyi niyetini ve tutarlılığını incelemektedir. Bu çerçevede, Türkiye’nin 1970 UNESCO Sözleşmesi ilkelerini ve buna göre yapılan ikili anlaşmaları nasıl uyguladığını değerlendirmek için iki iade vakası iyi niyet ve tutarlılık ilkelerine dayalı olarak incelenmektedir. İlk örnek, geri dönüşün ikili bir anlaşmaya dayalı olduğu Türkiye Cumhuriyeti ve Çin Halk Cumhuriyeti arasındayken, ikinci vaka, diplomatik ilişkilere dayalı olarak iadenin gerçekleştiği Türkiye Cumhuriyeti ve Irak Cumhuriyeti arasındadır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• ESER İADESİ
• ESER KAÇAKÇILIĞI
• İYİ NİYET
• KÜLTÜR VARLIĞI
• KÜLTÜREL DİPLOMASİ

Kaynakça

1. “Agreement between the Government of the Republic of Turkey and the Government of the People’s Republic of China on Preventing the Theft, Clandestine Excavation, and Illicit Import and Export of Cultural Property.” 9 September 2009. Official Gazette No. 27344. https://www.resmigazete.gov.tr/eskiler/2009/09/20090909-3-1.pdf.
2. “Agreement Between the Government of the Republic of Turkey and the Government of the Republic of Uzbekistan on Mutual Assistance in Preventing the Smuggling of Cultural Values and Securing Their Return.” 22 July 1998. Official Gazette No. 23410. https://www.resmigazete.gov.tr/arsiv/23410.pdf.
3. “Agreement Between the Government of Republic of Türkiye and the Swiss Federal Council on Preventing the Illicit Import and Transit and the Repatriation of Archaeological Cultural Property.” 24 March 2023. Official Gazette No. 32142. https://www.resmigazete.gov.tr/eskiler/2023/03/20230324-1.pdf.
4. Akbulut, Ali Rıza Akbulut. “Mısır’dan Çalınan Tarihi Eserler… Emanetleri Evlerine Gönderdik.” Hürriyet. 2 September 2022. https://www.hurriyet.com.tr/gundem/misirdan-calinan-tarihi-eserler-emanetleri-evlerine-gonderdik-42130228.
5. Alder, Christine, and Kenneth Polk. “Stopping This Awful Business: The Illicit Traffic in Antiquities Examined as a Criminal Market.” Art Antiquity and Law 7, no. 1 (2002): 35–53. https://heinonline.org/HOL/LandingPage? handle=hein.journals/artniqul7&div=6&id=&page=.
6. Amineddoleh, Leila. “Cultural Heritage Vandalism and Looting: The Role of Terrorist Organizations, Public Institutions and Private Collectors.” Santander Art and Culture Law Review 2, no. 1 (2015): 27–62. https://ssrn.com/abstract=2754843.
7. Art Basel. “The Art Basel and UBS Global Art Market Report.” 8 March 2019. https://www.artbasel.com/news/art-market-report.
8. Bayraktar, İpek, and Levent Tökün. “Two Case Studies: Turkey’s Approach to Cultural Property Repatriations.” In Advances in Cultural Heritage Studies: Year 2020; Contributions of the European Students’ Association for Cultural Heritage, edited by Alexandra de Carvalho Antunes, Grigor Angjeliu, and Mariagrazia Bellanova, 271–86. Oeiras: Mazu Press, 2020. https://www.esach.org/uploads/1/3/3/0/133018122/ebook_advances_2020_mazupress_.pdf.

9. Brodie, Neil, Morag M. Kersel, Simon Mackenzie, Isber Sabrine, Emiline Smith, and Donna Yates. “Why There is Still an Illicit Trade in Cultural Objects and What We Can Do About It.” Journal of Field Archaeology 47, no. 2 (2022): 117–30. 10.1080/00934690.2021.1996979.
10. Bogdanos, Matthew. “See No Evil: Museums, Art Collectors, and the Black Markets They Adore.” In Antiquities under Siege: Cultural Heritage Protection after the Iraq War, edited by Lawrance Rothfield, 57–62. Lanham, MD: AltaMira Press, 2008.
11. Collado, Kevin D. “A Step Back for Turkey, Two Steps Forward in the Repatriation Efforts of Its Cultural Property.” Case Western Reserve Journal of Law, Technology & the Internet 5 (2014): 1–24.
12. Coşkun, Yahya. Twitter. 31 May 2022. Accessed 10 August 2023. https://twitter.com/myahyacoskun/status/ 1509490540752130055?s=20.
13. Detling, Karen J. “Eternal Silence: The Destruction of Cultural Property in Yugoslavia.” Maryland Journal of International Law 17, no. 1 (1993): 66–68. http://digitalcommons.law.umaryland.edu/mjil/vol17/iss1/5.
14. European Commission. Commission Staff Working Document Impact Assessment: Accompanying the document Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the Import of Cultural Goods. Brussels: European Commission, 2017. https://ec.europa.eu/taxation_customs/system/files/2017-07/cultural_goods_impact_assessment_en.pdf.
15. Global Times. “Turkey Returns Historic Artifacts More Than 1,000 Years Old to China.” 26 November 2019. https://www.globaltimes.cn/content/1171285.shtml.
16. Goode, James F. Negotiating for the Past: Archaeology, Nationalism, and Diplomacy in the Middle East, 1919–1941. Austin: University of Texas Press, 2007.
17. Hanson, Katharyn. “Ancient Artefacts and Modern Conflict: A Case Study of Looting and Instability in Iraq.” In Cultural Heritage, Ethics, and the Military, edited by Peter G. Stone, 113–28. Woodbridge: Boydell & Brewer, 2011. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781846159442.008.
18. Hoffman, Matthew R. “Cultural Pragmatism: A New Approach to the International Movement of Antiquities.” Iowa Law Review 95 (2010): 665–77. https://heinonline.org/HOL/LandingPage?handle=hein.journals/ilr95&div=18&id=&page=.
19. ICOM International Observatory on Illicit Traffic in Cultural Goods. “Due Diligence/Good Faith.” Accessed 20 May 2023. https://www.obs-traffic.museum/due-diligence-good-faith.
20. ICRC Database, Treaties, States Parties and Commentaries. “Convention (IV) Respecting the Laws and Customs of War on Land and Its Annex: Regulations Concerning the Laws and Customs of War on Land.” The Hague. 18 October 1907. https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/ihl/INTRO/195.
21. ICRC Database, Treaties, States Parties and Commentaries. “Convention (II) with Respect to the Laws and Customs of War on Land and its Annex: Regulations concerning the Laws and Customs of War on Land.” The Hague. 29 July 1899. https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/ihl/INTRO/150.
22. Intergovernmental Committee for Promoting the Return of Cultural Property (ICPRCP). Free Ports and Risks of Illicit Trafficking of Cultural Property: Intergovernmental Committee for Promoting the Return of Cultural Property to Its Countries of Origin or Its Restitution in Case of Illicit Appropriation. Paris: ICPRCP, 2016. https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000372793.
23. International Council of Museums (ICOM). Code of Ethics: ICOM Code of Ethics for Museums. Paris: ICOM, 2017. https://icom.museum/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/ICOM-code-En-web.pdf.
24. International Institute for the Unification of Private Law (UNIDROIT). “Convention on Stolen or Illegally Exported Cultural Objects.” 24 June 1995. https://www.unidroit.org/instruments/cultural-property/1995-convention.
25. ---. “States Parties to the Convention on Stolen or Illegally Exported Cultural Objects.” 2023. https://www.unidroit.org/instruments/cultural-property/1995-convention/status/.
26. Januszkiewicz, Katarzyna. “Retroactivity in the 1970 UNESCO Convention: Cases of the United States and Australia.” Brooklyn Journal of International Law 41, no.1 (2015): 329–72. https://brooklynworks.brooklaw.edu/bjil/vol41/iss1/7.
27. “Joint Political Declaration on the Establishment of the High Level Strategic Cooperation Council Between Governments of the Republic of Turkey and the Republic of Iraq.” 10 July 2008. https://www.mfa.gov.tr/data/DISPOLITIKA/Bolgeler/ortadogu/irak/Ortak%20Siyasi%20Bilirge%20%C4%B0ngilizce.pdf.
28. Kalyoncuoğlu, Yasemin. “Çin’in Türkiye’deki İki Kültür Varlığı İade Edildi.” Anadolu Ajansı. 25 November 2019. https://www.aa.com.tr/tr/kultur-sanat/cinin-turkiyedeki-iki-kultur-varligi-iade-edildi/1655290.
29. Kersel, Morag M. “From the Ground to the Buyer: A Market Analysis of the Trade in Illegal Antiquities” In Archaeology, Cultural Heritage and the Antiquities Trade, edited by Neil Brodie, Morag M. Kersel, Christina Luke, and Kathryn Walker Tubb, 188–205. Gainesville: University Press of Florida, 2006.
30. “Korunması Gerekli Taşınır Kültür ve Tabiat Varlıkları Koleksiyonculuğu ve Denetimi Hakkında Yönetmelik.” 23 March 2010. Official Gazette No. 27530. https://www.resmigazete.gov.tr/eskiler/2010/03/20100323-3.htm.
31. Köklü, Lale, and Burak Milli. “Türkiye Sınırında Yakalanan Eserler Irak’a İade Edildi.” Anadolu Ajansı. 20 September 2019. https://www.aa.com.tr/tr/turkiye/turkiye-sinirinda-yakalanan-eserler-iraka-iade-edildi-/1589651.
32. McAndrew, Clare. The Art Market 2023. Basel: Art Basel and UBS, 2023. https://theartmarket.artbasel.com/download/The-Art-Basel-and-UBS-Art-Market-Report-2023.pdf.
33. Media Center of the Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs, U.S. Department of State. “United States and Turkey Work Together to Protect Cultural Heritage.” 19 January 2021. https://eca.state.gov/highlight/united-states-and-turkey-work-together-protect-cultural-heritage.
34. “Memorandum of Understanding Between the Government of the United States of America and the Government of the Republic of Turkey Concerning the Imposition of Import Restrictions on the Categories of Archaeological and Ethnological Material of Turkey.” 5 March 2021. Official Gazette No. 31414. https://www.resmigazete.gov.tr/eskiler/2021/03/20210305-13.pdf.
35. Lindsay, Ivan. History of Loot and Stolen Art from Antiquity until the Present Day. London: Unicorn Press, 2014. Price, Kathleen. “Who Owns the Past: Turkey’s Role in the Loss and Repatriation of Antiquities.” International Journal of Legal Information 38, no. 2 (2010): 201–13.
36. Prott, Lyndel V. “UNESCO and UNIDROIT: A Partnership against Trafficking in Cultural Objects.” Uniform Law Review 1, no.1 (January 1996): 59–71. https://doi.org/10.1093/ulr/1.1.59.
37. Republic of Türkiye Ministry of Culture and Tourism, Counsellor’s Office of Press and Public Relations. “Two Cultural Properties of China in Türkiye Returned with a Ceremony.” 25 November 2019. https://basin.ktb.gov.tr/EN-248932/two-cultural-properties-of-china-in-turkiye-returned-with-a-ceremony.html.
38. Steiner, Katie L. “Dealing with Laundering in the Swiss Art Market: New Legislation and Its Threat to Honest Traders.” Case Western Reserve Journal of International Law 49, no. 1 (2017): 351–72. https://scholarlycommons.law.case.edu/jil/vol49/iss1/21.
39. Stepnowska, Julia. “Due Diligence and the Art Market: Assessing the Impact of the 1995 UNIDROIT Convention on Stolen or Illegally Exported Cultural Objects.” Studia Iuridica Toruniensia 22 (2019): 377–92. https://doi.org/10.12775/SIT.2018.020.
40. T.C. Anayasa Mahkemesi. Constitution of the Republic of Turkey, 1982. https://www.anayasa.gov.tr/media/7258/anayasa_eng.pdf.
41. T.C. İçişleri Bakanlığı Emniyet Genel Müdürlüğü. İNTERPOL ve EUROPOL Daire Başkanlığı. “Hakkımızda.” Accessed 20 May 2023. https://www.egm.gov.tr/interpol/hakkimizda.
42. T.C. Kültür ve Turizm Bakanlığı Basın ve Halkla İlişkiler Müşavirliği. “Bakan Ersoy: “Her Eserin Doğduğu Yerde Korunması Esas Olmalıdır.” 25 January 2019. https://basin.ktb.gov.tr/TR-227510/bakan-ersoy-her-eserin-dogdugu-yerde-korunmasi-esas-olmalidir.html.
43. ---. “Çin’in Türkiye’deki İki Kültür Varlığı Düzenlenen Törenle İade Edildi.” 25 November 2019. https://basin.ktb.gov.tr/TR-248642/cin39in-turkiye39deki-iki-kultur-varligi-duzenlenen-torenle-iade-edildi.html.
44. ---. “Kültür ve Turizm Bakanlığının 2023 Bütçesi TBMM Plan ve Bütçe Komisyonunda.” 17 November 2022. https://basin.ktb.gov.tr/TR-332138/kultur-ve-turizm-bakanliginin-2023-butcesi-tbmm-plan-ve-butce-komisyonunda.html.
45. ---. “Türkiye’den Dünyaya Örnek Tarihi Eser Hassasiyeti.” 20 September 2019. https://basin.ktb.gov.tr/TR-243573/turkiyeden-dunyaya-ornek-tarihi-eser-hassasiyeti.html.
46. ---. “Türkiye ve İsviçre Arkeolojik Kültür Varlıklarının İadesine İlişkin Anlaşma İmzaladı.” 15 November 2022. https://basin.ktb.gov.tr/TR-332077/turkiye-ve-isvicre-arkeolojik-kultur-varliklarinin-iadesine-iliskin-anlasma-imzaladi.html.
47. T.C. Kültür ve Turizm Bakanlığı Kültür Varlıkları ve Müzeler Genel Müdürlüğü. “Sıkça Sorulan Sorular.” Accessed 1 May 2023. https://kvmgm.ktb.gov.tr/TR-63359/sikca-sorulan-sorular.html.
48. ---. “Yurt Dışından İadesi Sağlanan Eserler.” Accessed 20 May 2023. https://kvmgm.ktb.gov.tr/TR-44470/yurt-disindan-iadesi-saglanan-eserler.html.
49. The Grand National Assembly of Türkiye. Law on the Conservation of Cultural and Natural Property. Law No. 2863, Official Gazette No. 18113. 23 July 1983. https://kvmgm.ktb.gov.tr/TR-43249/law-on-the-conservation-of-cultural-and-natural-property-2863.html.
50. “Türkiye’de Ele Geçirilen 6 Parça Tarihi Eser Irak’a İade Edilecek.” Mynet YurtHaber. 20 October 2022. https://www.mynet.com/turkiyede-ele-gecirilen-6-parca-tarihi-eser-iraka-iade-edilecek-180105542156.
51. United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO). “1954 Convention for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict with Regulations for the Execution of the Convention.” 14 May 1954. https://en.unesco.org/sites/default/files/1954_Convention_EN_2020.pdf.
52. ---. “Convention on the Means of Prohibiting and Preventing the Illicit Import, Export and Transport of Ownership of Cultural Property.” 14 November 1970. http://portal.unesco.org/en/ev.php-URL_ID=13039&URL_DO=DO_TOPIC&URL_SECTION=201.html.
53. ---. “Operational Guidelines for the Implementation of the Convention on the Means of Prohibiting and Preventing the Illicit Import, Export and Transfer of Ownership of Cultural Property.” 1970. https://en.unesco.org/sites/default/files/operational_guidelines_en_final_final_1.pdf.
54. ---. “Protocol to the Convention for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict.” 14 May 1954. https://en.unesco.org/sites/default/files/1954_Protocol_EN_2020.pdf.
55. ---.“Second Protocol to the Hague Convention of 1954 for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict.” 26 March 1999. http://portal.unesco.org/en/ev.php-URL_ID=15207&URL_DO=DO_TOPIC&URL_SECTION=201.html.
56. ---. “States Parties to the Convention for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict with Regulations for the Execution of the Convention.” 2023. https://www.unesco.org/en/legal-affairs/convention-protection-cultural-property-event-armed-conflict-regulations-execution-convention?hub=66535#item-4.
57. ---. “States Parties to the Convention on the Means of Prohibiting and Preventing the Illicit Import, Export and Transfer of Ownership of Cultural Property.” 2023. https://www.unesco.org/en/legal-affairs/convention-means-prohibiting-and-preventing-illicit-import-export-and-transfer-ownership-cultural#item-2.
58. ---. “States Parties to the Protocol to the Convention for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict.” 2023. https://www.unesco.org/en/legal-affairs/protocol-convention-protection-cultural-property-event-armed-conflict?hub=66535#item-4.
59. United Nations Security Council. “The Situation between Iraq and Kuwait.” S/RES/1483. 22 May 2003. http://unscr.com/en/resolutions/doc/1483.
60. Velioglu, Ece, Alessandro Chechi, and Marc-André Renold. “Case Orpheus Mosaic: Turkey and Dallas Museum of Art.” Platform ArThemis, Art Law Centre, University of Geneva. May 2013. https://plone.unige.ch/art-adr/cases-affaires/orpheusmosaic-2013-turkey-and-dallas-museum-of-art/case-note-2013-orpheus-mosaic
61. Veres, Zsuzsanna. “The Fight against Illicit Trafficking of Cultural Property: The 1970 UNESCO Convention and the 1995
62. UNIDROIT Convention.” Santa Clara Journal International Law 12, no. 2 (2014): 91–114. https://digitalcommons.law.scu.edu/scujil/vol12/iss2/4.
63. Waxma, Sharon. Loot: The Battle over the Stolen Treasures of the Ancient World. New York: Times Books, 2008.
64. Figures Sources: - Figürlerin Kaynakları: Fig. 1: Chinese cultural objects on display at the handover ceremony in Ankara, Türkiye. Source Available at: https://basin.ktb.gov.tr/Resim/320730,1-4jpg.png?0.
65. Fig. 1: Ankara’daki iade töreninde sergilenen Çin kökenli kültürel varlıklar. Kaynak: https://basin.ktb.gov.tr/Resim/ 320730,1-4jpg.png?0.
66. Fig. 2: Çin’e iade edilen, Tang Hanedanı dönemindeki bir tapınağa ait duvar resmi (MS 618-907). Kaynak: https://basin.ktb.gov.tr/TR-248642/cin39in-turkiye39deki-iki-kultur-varligi-duzenlenen-torenle-iade-edildi.html.
67. Fig. 2: Returned mural painting to China from a temple of the Tang Dynasty (618-907 CE). Source Available at: https://basin.ktb.gov.tr/TR-248642/cin39in-turkiye39deki-iki-kultur-varligi-duzenlenen-torenle-iade-edildi.html.
68. Fig. 3: Repatriated Iraqi cylinder seal. Source Available at: https://basin.ktb.gov.tr/Resim/310467,1jpg.png?0.
69. Fig. 3: İadesi gerçekleştirilen, Irak kökenli silindir mühür. Kaynak: https://basin.ktb.gov.tr/Resim/310467,1jpg.png?0.
70. Fig. 4: Some of returned 81 Iraqi cultural objects displayed at the official ceremony in Hatay, Türkiye. Source Available at: https://basin.ktb.gov.tr/TR-243573/turkiyeden-dunyaya-ornek-tarihi-eser-hassasiyeti.html.
71. Fig. 4: Hatay’daki resmi iade töreninde sergilenen Irak kökenli 81 kültürel varlıktan bazıları. Kaynak: https://basin.ktb.gov.tr/TR-243573/turkiyeden-dunyaya-ornek-tarihi-eser-hassasiyeti.html.