Violations of cultural property and the erosion of international law

When cultural property is destroyed, stolen, or traded illegally, more than just material heritage is at stake—the very foundations of international law are threatened. Under the title “Violations of Cultural Property and the Erosion of International Law – The Right of the Strongest?”, a symposium held by the Jiří Toman Center for Cultural Heritage and Humanitarian Norms at the University for Continuing Education Krems on November 5 addressed the question of how effectively international law can still guarantee the protection of cultural property – and what responsibility states, organizations, and societies bear in this regard.

After a welcome address by Mag. Dr. Eva Maria Stöckler, MA, Dean of the Faculty of Education, Arts, and Architecture, Univ.-Prof. DDr. Peter Strasser, LL.M. opened the symposium with a tribute to the center's namesake. His lecture, “Jiří Toman – from refugee to university professor: his work for humanity and cultural heritage,” traced the impressive life of the Czech lawyer, who himself had experienced flight and exile and later established himself as one of the leading figures in international cultural property protection.

Toman was one of the co-authors of the Second Protocol to the Hague Convention of 1954 for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict – one of the most important sets of rules in international humanitarian law to this day. Strasser recalled that Toman was “not only a lawyer, but a humanist in the deepest sense,” who always strove to understand “law as a shield for humanity.”
In an emotional speech delivered by Lara Friedel, Jaroslava Toman Charbonnet, the honoree's daughter, summed up her father's attitude: “Kindness and courtesy characterized all of your relationships. You stood by everyone with advice and support, and built bridges between people through your many international friendships.

Culture as a task of the international community

Following this, Univ.-Ass. Mag. Dr. Sebastian M. Spitra, LL.M., University of Vienna, showed in his lecture “Culture as a Task of the International Legal Community” how closely modern international law is interwoven with the idea of cultural heritage. Spitra traced the development of this idea from the early initiatives of the League of Nations with its International Museums Office to the founding of UNESCO after the Second World War.

He referred to key works such as the 1970 UNESCO Convention on the Means of Prohibiting and Preventing the Illicit Import, Export and Transfer of Ownership of Cultural Property, the 1995 UNIDROIT Convention on the Return of Stolen Cultural Property, and the 1972 World Heritage Convention. According to Spitra, these documents “create a dense network of international obligations, but one that is repeatedly torn apart by power politics and economic interests.”

One focus of his contribution was on the restitution of colonial objects. Here, he advocated for new legal approaches that also take into account the normative knowledge of the societies of origin: “International law is not the exclusive language of the West – it must offer space for pluralistic understandings of law.

Cultural diplomacy at the end of the Cold War

In her presentation “Cultural Cooperation as a Bridge-Builder in Politically Divided Times,” Privatdozentin MMag. Dr. Andrea Brait from the University for Continuing Education Krems showed how cultural cooperation can function as a bridge-builder in politically divided times.

Using archive material and interviews with contemporary witnesses, she reconstructed how cultural policy within the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe (CSCE) – for example at the Vienna follow-up meetings in 1986–1989 – became an important political instrument.
“Austria has always taken the view that cultural cooperation can help to counteract the formation of blocs and build trust between states,” said Brait.

Quotes from diplomatic protocols, such as the statement made by Austrian Ambassador Rudolf Torovsky in 1986, illustrate the spirit of the time: “We do not accept geographical dividing lines – signs of the common cultural heritage of the CSCE states stretch from Vladivostok to Hawaii.”

International organizations caught between protection and sovereignty

In the first eyewitness interview, Peter Strasser spoke with Mag. Dr. Christoph Bazil, President of the Federal Monuments Office and between 2006 and 2007 Chairman of the intergovernmental Committee of the second Protocol 1999 to the 1954 Hague Convention, and Prof. Dr. Bernd von Droste zu Hülshoff, Founding Director of the UNESCO World Heritage Center, about the role of international organizations in protecting cultural heritage.

The UNESCO mission in Dubrovnik (1979–1998) highlighted the challenge of safeguarding cultural property in crisis regions while respecting national sovereignty.
Bernd von Droste reminded us that “reconstruction always means restoring a society's self-image” – a task that is equally complex from both a legal and psychological perspective.

The weapons of international law

In the second symposium block, Associate Professor Gabriel M. Lentner, University of Krems, analyzed the effectiveness of sanctions as a means of combating violations of cultural property under the title “The Weapons of International Law: The International Sanctions Regime and the Preservation of Cultural Property.”
He outlined how instruments of international law – from Article 41 of the UN Charter to UN Security Council Resolutions 1483 (Iraq) and 2199 (Syria) to EU Regulation 2019/880 on import controls for cultural property – can be used for protection.
Using case studies from Syria, Mali, Ukraine, and the Western Balkans, Lentner showed that sanctions are effective when they are embedded in national legal systems and controlled by the rule of law. “The destruction of cultural property is not a side issue of war, but a targeted attack on the identity of societies,” he emphasized. “International law must respond to this with determination – but also with legitimacy.”

Protection of cultural property in practice

Sylvia Preinsperger from the Austrian Federal Monuments Office provided an insight into national implementation with her presentation entitled “Illegal transfer of cultural property and the Federal Monuments Office's sanctions policy – aspiration and reality.”
She explained how national laws—such as the Monument Protection Act and the Cultural Property Restitution Act—interact with European directives and international conventions.
She described specific cases: from the return of a medieval statue discovered abroad to the restitution of Nazi-looted art under the 1998 Art Restitution Act.
Preinsperger made it clear that protecting cultural property is not only a legal responsibility, but also a moral one: “Every decision on restitution or approval is also a piece of historical reconciliation.

Cultural heritage in the post-conflict era

In the concluding discussion with contemporary witnesses, Dr. Friedhelm Frischenschlager, former Federal Minister, and DDr. Gerhard Sladek, militia brigadier and cultural property protection officer, discussed “Cultural heritage in the post-conflict period – between protection and reconstruction” with Strasser.
Using examples from Kosovo, they showed how destroyed buildings leave behind not only material wounds, but also symbolic ones. Sladek aptly put it: “Cultural heritage is often the first casualty of war—and in peacetime, it is the most difficult asset to restore.” Both emphasized that military, civilian, and NGO actors must work together in reconstruction efforts to create sustainable solutions

Touchstone of international law

In conclusion, Peter Strasser emphasized that the protection of cultural property has become a touchstone of international law. “Where culture is destroyed, it becomes clear how fragile the humanitarian norms on which international law is based are. The protection of cultural heritage is therefore not a luxury, but a litmus test of our civilization.”