.[Post under construction]Huffington Post readers can check for themselves the texts of 1)the ‘Convention on Cultural property Implementation Act’ (CCPIA): 19 United States Code 2600 http://exchanges.state.gov/heritage/culprop/laws/pdfs/2600.pdf and, 2) the 1970 UNESCO Convention on the Means of Prohibiting and Preventing the Illicit Import, Export and Transfer of Ownership of Cultural Property http://exchanges.state.gov/heritage/culprop/laws/pdfs/unesco01.pdfQuite clearly both refer only to restrictions on UNLAWFULLY EXPORTED (ie smuggled) artefacts. Perusal of the laws shows the author of this text is describing as in some way “unjust” restrictions on the import into the US of SMUGGLED archaeological artefacts and coins. It is totally untrue to say that only the US considers trade in such objects as illicit, that is the definition adopted by the 1970 Convention (Article 3) and apart from the USA, 120 other countries have now acceded to the convention. Many of them as a result have instituted implementation legislation like that of the US (http://www.ifar.org/art_law.php, Legislation International Ownership and Export ), for example Japan’s Law Concerning Controls on the Illicit Export and Import of Cultural Property’ and the British ‘Dealing in Cultural property (Offences) Act’ which (in different ways) go even further than the US requirements. Israel is introducing new legislation of this type this month http://www.jpost.com/NationalNews/Article.aspx?id=264615. It is untrue to say that attention paid to export procedure dates from the Iraq emergency laws http://exchanges.state.gov/heritage/culprop/chart2.pdf![]()
