GHA Priority IB: Protect Lawful Trade

I. Restore balance in U.S. government policy in favor of fostering appreciation of ancient and indigenous cultures and the preservation of archaeological and ethnographic artifacts for the education and enjoyment of the American public. 

B. Facilitate lawful trade in cultural artifacts openly and legally available for sale abroad. 

The Cultural Property Implementation Act (“CPIA”) limits the President’s authority to enter into Memorandums of Understanding (“MOUs”) with other countries that contemplate imposing import restrictions on cultural goods.  The CPIA makes entering into such MOUS contingent upon:

• A specific request that “must be accompanied by a written statement of facts known to the [1970 UNESCO Convention] State Party.” CPIA, 19 U.S.C. § 2602 (a) (3).
• Specific findings that: (a)  any restricted archaeological artifacts were “first discovered within” and are “subject to export control” by the State Party seeking restrictions (Id. § 2601 (2) (C)); (b) any restricted archaeological artifacts are of “cultural significance” and any restricted ethnological objects are “the product of a tribal or non-industrial society”  and “important” to the “cultural heritage of a people”  (Id. § 2601 (2) (C) (i) (I)) and (ii) (II); (c) less drastic remedies than import restrictions are unavailable (Id. § 2602 (a) (1) (C) (ii)); and (d) any restrictions are part of a “concerted international response” of other State Parties to the 1970 UNESCO Convention. Id. § 2602 (a) (1) (C) (i).  
• Moreover, the CPIA set up a panel of experts, the Cultural Property Advisory Committee (“CPAC”), to assist the President in his decision making.  Id. § 2605.
• In practice, the State Department (which has received a presidential delegation of authority) ignores all these limitations and instead imposes the broadest possible import restrictions in the interests of promoting “good will” with other countries.  CPAC was set up to help ensure the decision maker would balance restrictions against the benefits in terms of people to people contacts and the appreciation of other cultures collecting fosters.  Unfortunately, CPAC is currently packed with supporters of the archaeological lobby’s extremist views.  Moreover, archaeological advocacy groups’ support for broad restrictions have given the State Department political cover from the charge that import restrictions only disadvantage American citizens, museums and small businesses without having more than a negligible impact on looting.  
• We will advocate to ensure membership of CPAC reflects the interests of the public, the trade and museums rather than solely the interests of the archaeological lobby.  
• We will advocate moving CPAC to the Commerce Department to end built in conflict of interest in having the State Department administer program as a quid pro quo for other State Department initiatives and/or based on cronyism between staff and archaeological lobby.  
• We will propose legislative fixes to facilitate lawful trade in cultural artifacts on designated lists openly and legally available for sale and export in other UNESCO state parties.