Andreas Giorgallis writes:
The article examines some of the cardinal meeting points between PubIIL and PIL in transborder claims involving colonial cultural objects, and more specifically, the claim involving the icon of ‘Christ with the Crown of Thorns’. This claim is positioned within and outside the public and private, the national and the international spheres; and the contestation of where the icon belongs, draws attention to material/immaterial, public/private and national/international intersections.
This article also demonstrates how both PubIIL and PIL work hand-in-glove to validate the initial taking of the icon, promote its commercialisation, and relativise the significance of Ethiopia’s restitution claims.
The argument for a coordinated approach between the public and private realms and between national and international actors is further substantiated by ongoing practices in at least two areas that are in opposition to the predominant situation with regard to colonial cultural objects.
Firstly, the discourse surrounding integrative approaches to the illicit cross-border trade of cultural objects is deepening, also within the context of both the 1970 UNESCO Convention and the 1995 UNIDROIT Convention.
With regard to colonial cultural objects, the ongoing efforts of the Dutch Colonial Collections Committee are making strides in this direction. The decision to return over 28,000 specimens, most of which are fossils, to Indonesia in late September 2025, following a recommendation by the Committee, reflects a holistic approach that takes cognizance of the roles of both public and private actors in their removal.
