Buried Truth: A Criminological Analysis of the Illicit Antiquities Trade

• Author: Michelle Casey
• Position: Senior Sophister LLB Candidate, Trinity College Dublin
• Pages: 119-136

BURIED

TRUTH:

A

CRIMINOLOGICAL

ANALYSIS

OF

THE

ILLICIT

ANTIQUITIES TRADE

MICHELLE

CASEY*

The

international

trade

in

illicit

antiquities

is

worth billions

of

dollars every

year,'

with

countries

such

as

Turkey

identifying

antiquities smuggling

as

the

fourth

largest

source

of

illicit

income after

arms,

drug

smuggling

and

fraud.

2

A

prominent

and

problematic feature

of

this

trade

is

the

blurred

line

between

illicit and

licit

markets;

the

corollary

of

a

disparity

between

the

laws

of

countries where

such

goods

are

originally

stolen

and

those

in

which

they

ultimately

reside.

For the purposes

of

this

article 'illicit' refers

to

all

antiquities

circulating

in

the

market

which have

in

the

past

breached

a

legal

provision,

regardless

of

the

position taken

by

market

states

regarding

entry

and

purchase

within

their

jurisdiction.

'

A

further

difficulty

for

criminologists

seeking to

understand

this

trade lies

in

both

the

international

framework

of

the

market

and

the

tripartite trading

hierarchy:

original

looters,

the

smugglers, and

at

the top, the

collectors,

dealers

and

museum

curators.

The

consequences

of

allowing

this

criminal enterprise

to

flourish

includes

loss

of

historical

context,

the

destruction

by

looters

of

objects

perceived

to be

of

lesser

value,

damage

to

the

reputations

of

legitimate

dealers,

violence,

corruption,

and

the

strengthening

and

growth

of

transnational

criminal

organisations.'

Despite

the

ostensible impenetrability

of

the

market,

its

pernicious consequences

render

the

search

for

solutions

a

matter

of

urgency. This

article seeks

to

examine

each

of

the

three rungs

on

the

criminal

ladder

from

a

criminological

perspective,

and

consider

the

responses

posited

by

experts

in

order

to

determine

the

best possible

means

of curbing the

trade

in

illicit

antiquities.

Senior

Sophister

LLB

Candidate, Trinity

College

Dublin.

'Aloisi,

"Met

Could Return Antiquities

to

Italy"

The

Irish

Times,

3

December

2005.

2

Brodie,

Doole

and Watson,

"Stealing History:

The

Illicit Trade

in

Cultural

Material"

(

visited

4

January

2006)

3

Mackenzie,

"Dig

a

Bit

Deeper;

Law,

Regulation

and

the

Illicit

Antiquities

Market"

(2005)

45(3)

Brit

J

Crim

249,

at

252.

4

Brodie,

Illicit

Antiquities:

The

Situation

in

South-East

Asia,

at

para.

3,

(visited

4

January 2006).

© 2006

Michelle

Casey and

Dublin

University

Law

Society

Trinity

College

Law

Review

Part

1:

The

Art

of

the

Steal

and the

Ordinary

Decent

Criminal

Mackenzie defines looting

as

"any

removal

of

antiquities

from

the

ground

or

other

place

of

rest

... which contravenes

the

law

of

the

source

country".

5

Such

practices have been

ongoing

for centuries.

Conklin

alludes

to

the

fact

that

looters,

cemetery

guards,

priests,

and

political

officials

frequently

conspired

to

locate

and

plunder

other

Egyptian

tombs, 6

for

instance,

Tutankhamen's

tomb

was

looted

just

fifteen

years after

his

death.

Indeed,

looting

has

been

termed

"a

cultural

construction"

7

given that

"the

definition

of

the

action depends upon

prevailing

sentiment".'

In

colonial

times

such

activity

was

viewed

as

the

rescue

of

relics

from

irresponsible

and

untrustworthy

natives

with

the

perpetrators being hailed

as

"adventurers".'

Although

this

philosophy

is

expounded

by

few

today,

the

practice

of

looting continues

to

thrive.

The

removal

of

barriers

to

communication

and

transport,

the

opening

up

Asian

and

African

markets,

a

greater

interest

in

ethnographic material,

the

use

of

improved

means

of

detection

and

destruction,

and

new

methods

of

marketing

and selling

cultural

property

are

among

the

primary

causes.

'0

The

intemet

has

proven

particularly

influential

as

it

has

opened the

market

to

millions

of

new

customers

and

is

almost

impossible

for

the

police

to

control."

In

seeking

to restrain

the

trade

in

illicit antiquities,

both

Conklin

and

Polk

opine that

criminological

theories

of

crime

prevention

are

applicable

to

the

antiquities

market.

2

They

specifically refer

to

the

routine activity approach which

highlights

three

components

to

be

considered

in

addressing

crime

prevention.

'"

These

components

are

motivated

offenders,

the

nature

of

opportunities

for

carrying out

the

crime (which

in

this

case

includes

market

access)

and

the

presence

of

"capable

guardians".

"

An

analysis

of

each

of

these

elements

5

Mackenzie,

"Illicit Antiquities, Criminological Theory,

and

the

Deterrent

Power

of

Criminal

Sanctions

for Targeted

Populations"

(2002)

7(2)

A A

& L

125,

at

125-126.

6 Conklin,

Art

Crime

(Praeger,

1994),

at

158.

7 Mackenzie,

"Dig

a

Bit

Deeper; Law,

Regulation

and

the

Illicit

Antiquities

Market",

loc.

cit.,

at 250.

Ibid.

9

1bid.

"0 Brodie, Doole and Watson,

loc.

cit.,

at

11.

11

Ibid.

12

Polk,

Art

Crime

and

Prevention:

Best

Practices

artcrime/polkart.html>

(visited 4 January 2006).

See

also,

Conklin,

op.

cit.,

at

119.

13

Cohen

and

Felson,

"Social

Change

and

Crime

Rate

Trends:

A

Routine

Activity

Approach"

(1979)

44

Am

Soc

Rev

588.

14

Polk,

loc.

cit.

[Vol.

9