Dissolution of the Advisory Commission

The Advisory Commission, which is supposed to mediate in conflicts over the restitution of artworks confiscated as a result of Nazi persecution, has been criticized for some time. Now it is to be dissolved, as its members were informed at a meeting in the Chancellery at the end of May. It is to be replaced by an arbitration tribunal.

The “Advisory Commission in connection with the restitution of cultural property seized as a result of Nazi persecution, in particular Jewish property”, also known as the Limbach Commission, was established in 2003. Its purpose was to mediate in conflicts between the heirs of Jewish collectors and German museums regarding the restitution of Nazi-looted property and to contribute to “fair and just solutions” in accordance with the Washington Declaration of 1998. In the approximately 20 years of its existence, it has been called upon 24 times to make its recommendations, which are not legally binding. The fact that the Commission has been called upon so rarely may also be due to the fact that it can only be called upon by mutual agreement. This fact has often led to displeasure among heirs. The case of the painting “Madame Soler”, which Pablo Picasso painted in 1903, is probably well known. The painting is owned by the Bavarian State Painting Collection and the state of Bavaria refuses to consult the Advisory Commission in a dispute with the descendants of the Mendelssohn banking family. This case shows how things should not be done and was also strongly criticized at an international conference in Washington and at a hearing of the Bundestag’s Culture Committee.
Nevertheless, it should not be forgotten that many museums and heirs were able to come to an agreement without the help of the Advisory Commission and that many restitutions are carried out quietly in the spirit of a “fair and equitable solution”. Other points of criticism of the Commission’s work were that it worked too slowly and that its decisions were not transparent. The Commission took this as an opportunity to redesign its rules of procedure in 2016. The decision to dissolve the commission was taken at the 20th Cultural Policy Summit in March of this year. Claudia Roth invited the members of the Commission to a meeting at the Federal Chancellery at the end of May to inform them that the dissolution would now be completed. Originally, the coalition parties FDP, Greens and SPD had agreed to reform the committee in the 2021 coalition agreement. How to proceed after the end of the Advisory Commission is to be worked out in a corresponding concept by the beginning of October and decided by the federal, state and local authorities as soon as possible.

According to media reports, one of the invited commission members felt that the conversation with Roth was a farce. They were allowed to raise objections to the end of the Consultative Commission and were also asked to continue with their work. However, the decision to dissolve it was not abandoned. The originally planned strengthening of the Advisory Commission, which the Greens, FDP and SPD had agreed, has therefore been canceled. This is despite the fact that, according to media reports, Minister of State for Culture Claudia Roth stated that they wanted to avoid the descendants of people who were robbed by the National Socialists having to act as petitioners. The plan was for the Commission to be able to initiate proceedings independently in order to avoid cases such as the one in Bavaria with the Picasso painting “Madame Soler”. Instead of taking this reform step, Claudia Roth, representatives of the federal states and municipal umbrella organizations decided back in March to “replace the Commission with an arbitration tribunal”. Hans-Jürgen Papier, who has chaired the Advisory Commission since 2017, has long warned that Germany is not sufficiently fulfilling its obligation to the Washington Agreement. This is also due to the fact that the Commission is too weak in its current form. However, abolishing the committee was certainly not in his interest. Especially as, according to media reports, it gives pause for thought that arbitration tribunals are hardly conceivable without double consent and that a promise of unilateral appeal can therefore not be kept. As former President of the Federal Constitutional Court, he knows what he is talking about. According to media reports, he also suggested that such an institution still had to be established. Both human and financial resources would have to be made available for this. Until this had been done, proceedings would have to be put on hold. He was of the opinion that the commission should be transformed from an advisor into a decision-maker, as Deutschlandfunk found out. Once again, demands for a restitution law are being voiced by representatives of the Jewish Claims Conference, among others, as was reported in the Jüdische Allgemeine. The Bavarian Minister of Culture Markus Blume is also calling for such a law and has launched a Bundesrat initiative to this end. At a hearing of the Committee for Culture and Media in March, however, there was a mixed response to such a law. However, the fact that the Advisory Commission was still being worked on at the time was a cause for concern. The decision to dissolve the Commission came as a surprise two days after the committee hearing. It now remains to be seen how the Federal Government intends to regulate the restitution of art and cultural assets seized as a result of Nazi persecution in the future. However, all those involved agree that Germany in particular needs a regulation, especially as it has committed itself to the Washington Principles.