Kulturgutschutz unter Wirtschaftlichkeitsvorbehalt

Steffen M. Jauß

doi:10.5771/2193-7869-2018-2-150

Contents
- Chapter Expand | CollapseAuthorsPage
- 95–95 Titelei/Inhaltsverzeichnis 95–95
- 96–96 AutorInnen 96–96
- 97–116 Von Katalonien bis Kosovo: Kritische Gedanken zur Normativkonstruktion der Remedial Secession Benedikt Harzl Benedikt Harzl 97–116
- 117–126 Was einte die „Juristen im Widerstand gegen Hitler“? Bemerkungen zu einer späten Festschrift Franz Hederer Franz Hederer 117–126
- 127–149 Perversion of Law: Six Cases José Rodrigo Rodriguez José Rodrigo Rodriguez 127–149
- 150–170 Kulturgutschutz unter Wirtschaftlichkeitsvorbehalt Steffen M. Jauß Steffen M. Jauß 150–170
- 171–182 Ein Mehr an Grundrechtsschutz Roman Kaiser Roman Kaiser 171–182
Durchsuchen Sie das Werk
Geben Sie ein Keyword in die Suchleiste ein
Access

KritV Kritische Vierteljahresschrift für Gesetzgebung und Rechtswissenschaft , page 150 - 170

Kulturgutschutz unter Wirtschaftlichkeitsvorbehalt

Autoren

Steffen M. Jauß

DOI
- doi.org/10.5771/2193-7869-2018-2-150
- ISSN: 2193-7869
- ISSN online: 2193-7869
Zusammenfassung

The legislator has based the new Act on the Protection of Cultural Property on the idea that certain objects should be subject to special protection because of their significance for cultural life. However, the legislator does not live up to his own requirements. Instead he makes the protection of the substance and of the location absolute, regardless if this promotes cultural life. On the one hand this is noticeable for the matter of the protection against the outflow of cultural property. The respective provisions refer to certain value and age thresholds but not to the object’s significance for the cultural life. On the other hand the diligence that the art market is obligated to observe largely depends on economic criteria. Thus, if the legislator defines whether an object is worth protecting by applying primarily economic criteria he contradicts his own values. Not least because he considers international interests only to the absolute minimal extend, there will be further cause for thorough discussion about the German approach to the protection of cultural property in the future.

Abstract

The legislator has based the new Act on the Protection of Cultural Property on the idea that certain objects should be subject to special protection because of their significance for cultural life. However, the legislator does not live up to his own requirements. Instead he makes the protection of the substance and of the location absolute, regardless if this promotes cultural life. On the one hand this is noticeable for the matter of the protection against the outflow of cultural property. The respective provisions refer to certain value and age thresholds but not to the object’s significance for the cultural life. On the other hand the diligence that the art market is obligated to observe largely depends on economic criteria. Thus, if the legislator defines whether an object is worth protecting by applying primarily economic criteria he contradicts his own values. Not least because he considers international interests only to the absolute minimal extend, there will be further cause for thorough discussion about the German approach to the protection of cultural property in the future.
Share