Renewing the Pledge to Protect our Cultural Properties and Heritage
On August 15 (2019), a news report emerged that two artefacts were stolen in the past, a lime stone-carved relief sculpture and a Krishna bronze sculpture, were returned to India. More than 30 such artefacts have been returned to India in the last five years as an act of repatriation of objects of cultural importance. Although this is good news, much must be done to protect India’s valuable artworks, which have become the victim of malicious designs by international smugglers earning huge returns from such illegal trade. Recently, the Vice President of India urged governmental and non-governmental organisations to work together and take up the task of preserving the country's tangible and intangible cultural heritage. This must be taken up with utmost sincerity.
Art and antiquity theft is a significant problem not only in India but across the globe. According to the Global Financial Integrity Report (2017), illicit trade in cultural property, listed as a separate category under transnational crime, represents 20 per cent of all art crime and generates an estimated $1.2 billion to $1.6 billion in illicit. According to this report, this criminal market covers a range of illegal activities, including the theft of cultural property from museums, the illicit excavation and looting of archaeological sites, and the use of faked or forged documentation to enable both illegal import and export as well as illicit transfers in ownership.[1]
The increasing numbers of thefts of art objects leading to illicit trafficking at national and international levels have awakened museum authorities around the world. The growing disregard for cultural heritage and the steeping rate of stolen antiquities results in a significant increase in the cases of pilferage and illicit trade. Since the gap in the ratio of demand and supply of artefacts is rather too large, along with the museums, equally vulnerable are the art objects from the excavated sites, monuments, religious sites and art galleries.
The news of four masked men breaking into the Museum of East Asian Art in Bath (UK), stealing gold and jade artifacts at the wee hours of April 17, 2018, came as a shocker. A similar crime was reported at the beginning of 2018, where thieves reportedly deactivated a sophisticated security system and decamped with the antiquities from Doge’s Palace in Venice (Italy). What is even more appalling is that this incident took place in broad daylight as soon as the Museum opened on the last day of the exhibition of “Treasures of the Mughals and Maharajas”.
Back home in India, similar incidences of theft in museums and temples and trafficking of precious cultural properties occur in regular intervals, often overlooked by investigating agencies as isolated petty burglaries. In November 2017, around 15 pieces of textiles were stolen from the National Handicrafts and Handlooms Museum in Delhi. In September 2018, a three-tiered golden tiffin box was missing from the Nizam Museum in Hyderabad. Though these incidents surprised many, they also put a question mark on the security arrangements in place for such well-kept museums. A swift police investigation, however, cracked both the cases.
However, not all theft cases have such desirable results. As per the statistics reported in 2016 in Crimes in India published by the National Crimes Records Bureau (NCRB), out of 1413 cases of stolen cultural property, only 330 cases were solved. [2] The Archaeological Survey of India ( ASI) is one of India's largest repositories of antiquities and is responsible for the security and display of its antiquities. The report of the Comptroller and Auditor General of India on the performance audit on the Preservation and Conservation of Monuments and Antiquities (2013) suggests that 131 antiquities from monuments/sites and 37 antiquities from Site Museums of ASI were found to have been stolen from 1981 to 2012. [3] This is ongoing even though India is a signatory to the 1970 UNESCO convention on the means of prohibiting and preventing the illicit import, export and transfer of ownership of cultural property and the 1995 UNIDROIT Convention on the International return of stolen or illegally exported cultural objects.
There are various motivations behind the theft of art. It could be for ransom, where museums offer rewards to claim the objects back, to gather funds for war or terror activities, or simply to obtain instant cash. For example, the sanitation workers at Teen Murti Bhawan in New Delhi burgled an object to repay their loans. All these cases have one thing in common: the money factor attached to the object.
A close observation of most of the cases of art theft in museums around the world determines a pattern that all the perpetrators were well informed or familiar with the security system and layout of the museums. Museums tighten their security only after such cases come into the limelight, including CCTV activation and security alarm systems. Most of the time, losses are not reported as the description of objects is inadequate, and sometimes, the photographs are also missing from the tally. Hence, the stolen object quickly enters the legitimate trade stream.
The Indian Treasure Trove Act was passed in 1878 to protect and preserve art treasures having archaeological and historical value. Likewise, the Antiquities and Art Treasures (AAT) Act was passed in 1972 to effectively control the moveable cultural property of antiquities and art treasures. The AAT Act was followed by AAT Rules 1973, which were enforceable since 1976. However, some shortcomings have been noticed in these Acts, which have facilitated illegal trade and smuggling of antiquities and art treasures. The definition of antiquities should be revisited to include items left out so far. The provision for the import of antiquities should be spelt out. In some of the theft cases, it has been found that the replicas have replaced the original statues. The criteria for making replicas should be discouraged or certain restrictions should be adhered to.
While working on the necessary amendments to the existing Acts and building an inventory of antiquities, efforts should be taken to include some proactive measures for retrieving antique objects like checking the catalogues of international auction houses, taking up the case with the International Art Loss Registry and issuing alerts in public forums on such theft cases. Publicizing a theft can cause a reduction in the value of stolen works, as well as carrying too many risks while selling the same.
The ASI is the nodal agency for retrieving stolen or illegally exported art objects, but the antiquities recovered since 1976 are still well under three digits. Some websites, like the India Pride project and Plundered Past, facilitate the recovery of cases by sharing information about stolen artefacts and their details in museums and auction catalogues around the world.
Moreover, the vigilant people of a country are the best safeguard against the loss of cultural property. While the government does its job, we as responsible citizens should also do our bit as laid out in Part IV (A) of the Indian Constitution dealing with fundamental duties that state, ‘It shall be the duty of every citizen of India to value and preserve the rich heritage of our composite culture.’
NOTES
[1] Channing May, Transnational Crime and the Developing World, March 2017, https://www.gfintegrity.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/Transnational_Cr…
[2] “Crime In India: Statistics 2016”, National Crime Records Bureau, Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India, http://ncrb.gov.in/StatPublications/CII/CII2016/pdfs/NEWPDFs/Crime%20in…
[3] “Report of the Comptroller and Auditor General of India on Performance Audit Of Preservation And Conservation Of Monuments And Antiquities”, 2013, https://cag.gov.in/sites/default/files/audit_report_files/Union_Perform…