Australian galleries must be more proactive in returning Nazi-looted artwork

Australia’s art galleries are falling behind the rest of the world in their response to stolen art, according to restitution experts.

Swiss-based lawyer Olaf Ossmann says Australia’s galleries need to become more proactive, not reactive, when it comes to restitution. Picture: Mark Stewart

Australia’s art galleries are falling behind the rest of the world in their approach to stolen art and restitution disputes, says the lawyer who brought the only successful restitution claim against an Australian gallery over Nazi art, with the country’s cultural institutions having turned a blind eye to theft.

German lawyer Olaf Ossmann, who spearheaded Australia’s first successful Nazi restitution claim against the National Gallery of Victoria, told The Australian the country’s leading galleries remain “reactive and not proactive” in their approach to artworks with questionable provenance.

It comes after The Australian revealed the descendants of a wealthy Jewish merchant were preparing to revive a longstanding restitution case against the NGV for a painting they claim was sold to the Nazis under duress and later acquired by the gallery in 1945.  Mr Ossmann, who will lead the claim on behalf of the family, said Australia’s art galleries appeared to be falling behind international standards set in Europe, the US and Britain and had not adapted their practices.

The Emden family claim Gerard Ter Borch’s Lady with a Fan belongs to their family.

“The reaction to restitution claims by many art institutions around the world more than a decade ago was simply ‘Show us your papers, we check it and if it’s not sufficient, you just have to go back home and do your homework’.

“I think this has changed. In 2022, art galleries and museums can also assist with the provenance homework. They can be much more proactive in investigating … But I am concerned Australia is not as open about this as it could be,” he said.

In the late 1990s, after a conference in Washington on seizure of Holocaust-era assets, Australian galleries began disclosing what they knew about paintings with suspect gaps in their provenance.

Yet, says lawyer George Newhouse, who was part of the original NGV claim more than 15 years ago, little has changed since. “Over the past 20 years, countries around the world have acknowledged they have not done enough to restore confiscated, stolen or looted property to its true owners.

“Europe and America have made great improvements in restoring property, but Australia is a laggard. Unlike other nations, Australia has no legislation covering art that was looted or stolen during World War II.”

Sydney-based lawyer George Newhouse.

In 2014, a review of the goals set out at the Washington conference concluded Australia had made only “some steps” towards reaching international targets, ranking it one of the lowest performing nations out of 50 signatories.

“Australian galleries did say [in 2014] they would revisit earlier acquisitions to rule out looting during the Holocaust but not much has come of that process,” Mr Newhouse said.

Unlike the US and parts of Europe, which established restitution committees to address looted or confiscated cultural prop­erty, Mr Newhouse said, there was no formal procedure or independent body that heirs could approach in Australia.

“Australian galleries force claimants to prove claims in court, which can be extremely difficult given the time that has elapsed and the difficulties of proving provenance in wartime. “There is a need for a separate, informal body to deal with Nazi-related restitution cases,” he said.