Countering

Sophie Delepierre and Marina Schneider
societies together’. Establishing actions to safeguard these items is thus essential.
Within the framework of the debates conducted under the auspices of ICOM’s
International Observatory on Illicit Traffic in Cultural Goods, the present article seeks
to present an overview of the main international agreements relating to such trafficking,
namely the UNESCO Convention on the Means of Prohibiting and Preventing the
Illicit Import, Export and Transfer of Ownership of Cultural Property (hereafter ‘the
1970 Convention’) and the UNIDROIT Convention on Stolen or Illegally Exported
Cultural Objects (hereafter ‘the 1995 Convention’), which together are considered
to be the fundamental point of reference on the subject. This approach has certain
limitations for various reasons. Firstly, concerning the instruments predating the
1970 Convention, which will not be addressed in this article. These include, notably,
UNESCO’s recommendations on the protection of cultural property, which indubitably
constitute a body of legal principles that States belonging to the Organization must take
into account 2 . Secondly, restrictions related to other international agreements, whether
established before or after the Conventions of 1970 and 1995, which broach the subject
on the trafficking of cultural property indirectly, and certainly deserve to be studied in
their own right 3 .
The first international instrument for the protection of cultural heritage during
peacetime: The UNESCO 1970 Convention
True to its name, this international convention sets out measures for preventing and
prohibiting the illegal import, export or transfer of ownership of cultural property.
While the final text of the treaty is a compromise as a result of protracted negotiations,
it has the merit of expounding a number of strong principles regarding prohibitions
on the import and export of stolen or illicitly exported cultural property. The challenge
for the international community – and for UNESCO, which oversees the initiative – is
ensuring its implementation. By ratifying the Convention, States undertake to develop
national legislation based on these principles, and specifically, to establish the legal and
technical means necessary for the protection of cultural heritage. In other words, the
burden lies with each State Party to the Convention of 1970 as regards the regulation of
transactions involving cultural property within its territory and the definition of licit and
illicit activities.
The substance of the Convention focuses on three areas commonly referred to as
its ‘three pillars’. The first of these concerns measures at the national level to effectively
combat illicit trafficking in cultural property; the second addresses the issue of restitution;
while the third pillar deals with cooperation among States 4 .
Preventive measures at the national level
To achieve the goals set out by the Convention’s principles, States must undertake a
certain number of preventive measures, which include creating a national system for
taking inventory and compile a list of cultural property to be protected, requiring and
issuing export certificates for all protected cultural property, regulating archaeological
excavations, enforcing accurate transaction registers among antique dealers, recruiting
and training not only heritage professionals but also the police force and custom officers,
in addition to promoting the development of curatorial institutions such as museums,
libraries and archives, to name only a few.
While the Convention strongly urges States to enact these measures, the latter may, in
130