TY  - GEN
N2  - This Note analyzes how property rights can shift during wartime, in addition to examining the question of whether or not they should. Part I examines the historical background underlying government-organized art theft  and  the  looting  and  destruction  of  cultural  property,  including contributing  ideological  factors,  how  restitution  efforts  have  developed over time, and the legal landscape governing the outcomes of proceedings involving stolen art and antiquities. Part II analyzes the ramifications of these legal developments, particularly how the law has affected victims’ property  rights  and  answered  to  the  lingering  effects  of  the  Holocaust. Further, Part II compares the laws addressing Holocaust-era art claims to treaties governing the ongoing crisis of ISIS-looted cultural property. Part III proposes five reform factors for the newly-implemented HEAR Act to take into consideration in order to allow victims the broadest opportunity to seek restitution: (1) the shifting of the due diligence analysis onto the current possessor of afflicted art, (2) the complete removal of the Act’s federal statute of limitations, (3) alternatively, the substitution of a more favorable  demand  and  refusal  rule,  (4)  providing  attorneys’  fees  for claimants,   and   (5)   the   removal   of   the   Act’s   sunset   provision.
AB  - This Note analyzes how property rights can shift during wartime, in addition to examining the question of whether or not they should. Part I examines the historical background underlying government-organized art theft  and  the  looting  and  destruction  of  cultural  property,  including contributing  ideological  factors,  how  restitution  efforts  have  developed over time, and the legal landscape governing the outcomes of proceedings involving stolen art and antiquities. Part II analyzes the ramifications of these legal developments, particularly how the law has affected victims’ property  rights  and  answered  to  the  lingering  effects  of  the  Holocaust. Further, Part II compares the laws addressing Holocaust-era art claims to treaties governing the ongoing crisis of ISIS-looted cultural property. Part III proposes five reform factors for the newly-implemented HEAR Act to take into consideration in order to allow victims the broadest opportunity to seek restitution: (1) the shifting of the due diligence analysis onto the current possessor of afflicted art, (2) the complete removal of the Act’s federal statute of limitations, (3) alternatively, the substitution of a more favorable  demand  and  refusal  rule,  (4)  providing  attorneys’  fees  for claimants,   and   (5)   the   removal   of   the   Act’s   sunset   provision.
T1  - Art as a Weapon
AU  - Akhavan, Sahar
LA  - eng
ID  - 42008
KW  - Illicit art trade
KW  - Cultural property
KW  - Holocaust
KW  - Looting
KW  - HEAR Act
SN  - 0736-7694
TI  - Art as a Weapon
LK  - http://www.cardozoaelj.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/AKHAVAN_NOTE.pdf
UR  - http://www.cardozoaelj.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/AKHAVAN_NOTE.pdf
ER  -