Skip to main content

Looking ahead to new laws in Egypt

Egypt will be revising its laws relating to antiquities (see Nevine El-Aref, "Hands off, and we mean it", Al-Ahram Weekly 938 (12-18 March 2009)). Among the proposals is a change to the ownership of antiquities:
The second article to be repealed is the section of the law allowing possession of antiquities. A year after the approval of the law, all owners of Egyptian antiquities must hand over all objects to the SCA, which in its turn will install them in their archaeological storehouses.
The penalties will also be increased:
A smuggler who was sentenced to 15 years and fined LE50,000 would now be sentenced to life imprisonment and fined from LE100,000 to 500,000. Anyone who steals, hides, or collects authentic artefacts, or owns them without permission, will be imprisoned for 25 years and fined from LE50,000-250,000, instead of three years' hard labour and a LE100 fine. According to the new law, stealing or helping to rob a part of a genuine piece or intent deliberately to disfigure it will land a sentence of 15 years and a fine of from LE50,000-100,000.
There is also going to be a big change to Intellectual Property Rights (IP) (see earlier accounts from the BBC):
Sanctions would be placed for using photographs of archaeological sites or artefacts for commercial purposes without the permission of the SCA. Professional photography inside museums and archaeological sites will be completely prohibited unless permission has been given. Using photographs for educational purposes, by governmental authorities, for tourist attraction and for personal use will be free of charge; although the intellectual property on its own "logos" and trademarks will remain with the authority.

Comments

David - Although I totally side with Egypt in trying to control the looting of their heritage, these types of law leaves much room for unscrupulous dealings that can happen when an organization (government or otherwise) is given such broad power. I also think of how this will affect the working class who work in the tourism industry (taking photographs, selling replicas, etc).
David Gill said…
Victoria
These are helpful comments. Thank you!
David

Popular posts from this blog

Codename: Ainsbrook

I have been watching (UK) Channel 4's Time Team this evening. The programme looked at an undisclosed field (under a potato crop) where a Viking burial had been found. The location in Yorkshire was so sensitive that it was given a codename: Ainsbrook. Here is the summary:
In late 2003 two metal detectorists were working in a field in Yorkshire. They found 'treasure' buried just beneath the surface – a collection of Viking material next to a body. Although they had been detecting on the site for a number of years, during which time they had made large numbers of finds, nothing they had uncovered previously compared with this. They decided to share their discovery with archaeologists.The programme explored the tension between metal-detectorists and the English Heritage sponsored archaeologists putting six trenches into the field based on a geo-physical survey. Finds made by the metal-detectorists did not easily map onto the archaeological features.

Part of the programme had an …

George Ortiz collection to be displayed in London

Christie's is due to display part of the former collection of the late George Ortiz in London in a non-selling show to mark the 25th anniversary of the exhibition at the Royal Academy. There is a statement on the Christie's website ("The Ortiz Collection — ‘proof that the past is in all of us’"). Max Bernheimer is quoted: ‘Ortiz was one of the pre-eminent collectors of his day’.

We recall the associations with Ortiz such as the Horiuchi sarcophagus, the Hestiaios stele fragment, the marble funerary lekythos, and the Castor and Pollux.

Bernheimer will, no doubt, wish to reflect on the Royal Academy exhibition by reading Christopher Chippindale and David W. J. Gill. 2000. "Material consequences of contemporary classical collecting." American Journal of Archaeology 104: 463-511 [JSTOR].

Bernheimer will probably want to re-read the two pieces by Peter Watson that appeared in The Times: , "Ancient art without a history" and "Fakes - the artifice b…

Tutankhamun, Christie's and rigorous due dligence

It was announced today that the Egyptian authorities would be taking legal action against Christie's over the sale of the head of Tutankhamun ("Egypt to sue Christie's to retrieve £4.7m Tutankhamun bust", BBC News 9 July 2019).

The BBC reports:
Egypt's former antiquities chief, Zahi Hawass, said the bust appeared to have been "stolen" in the 1970s from the Temple of Karnak. "The owners have given false information," he told AFP news agency. "They have not shown any legal papers to prove its ownership." Christie's maintain the history of the piece as follows:
It stated that Germany's Prince Wilhelm von Thurn und Taxis reputedly had it in his collection by the 1960s, and that it was acquired by an Austrian dealer in 1973-4. However the family of von Thurn und Taxis claim that the head was never in that collection [see here].

Christie's reject any hint of criticism:
"Christie's would not and do not sell any work whe…