Heritage Contraband: Mapping US Policy to Combat International Illicit Trafficking of Cultural Property

Autores/as

  • Hyojung Cho Texas Tech University

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.12795/CEC.2025.i11.05

Palabras clave:

tráfico ilícito de bienes culturales, Convención de La Haya de 1954 para la Protección de los Bienes Culturales, Convención de la UNESCO de 1970, Ley de Implementación de la Convención sobre Bienes Culturales, Ley de Salvaguarda de Objetos de Patrimonio Tribal, Política de Patrimonio Cultural de los Estados Unidos

Resumen

Aunque Estados Unidos ha mostrado liderazgo en la defensa de la protección del patrimonio cultural en el ámbito mundial desde la Segunda Guerra Mundial, su vacilación y los retrasos en la ratificación o implementación de convenciones clave, junto con las reiteradas retiradas de la UNESCO, sugieren lo contrario en cuanto a su compromiso. La geopolítica del siglo XXI ha elevado la lucha contra el tráfico ilícito de bienes culturales, destacando no solo la salvaguarda del patrimonio colectivo de la humanidad, sino también el mantenimiento de las relaciones internacionales y la seguridad nacional de Estados Unidos, lo que ha dado lugar a diversas respuestas políticas. Esta investigación evalúa las políticas estadounidenses dirigidas a contrarrestar el tráfico ilícito internacional de bienes culturales, subrayando la necesidad de una reevaluación a la luz de las nuevas dinámicas globales y de los recientes cambios legislativos. La diversidad de motivaciones y dinámicas políticas, influenciadas por los equilibrios de poder globales y las relaciones con las comunidades indígenas, indica que las políticas actuales para controlar el tráfico ilícito internacional de bienes culturales presentan importantes vacíos. El mapeo de estas políticas revela inconsistencias y deficiencias en los esfuerzos de Estados Unidos para combatir este problema, lo que pone de manifiesto la urgente necesidad de mejoras.

Descargas

Los datos de descargas todavía no están disponibles.

Citas

Association on American Indian Affairs. (2014). A guide to international repatriation: Starting an initiative in your community. https://www.indian-affairs.org/uploads/8/7/3/8/87380358/international_repatriation_guide.pdf

Borke, K. E. (2003). Searching for a solution: An analysis of the legislative response to the Iraqi antiquities crisis of 2003. DePaul Journal of Art, Technology & Intellectual Property Law, 13, 381. https://via.library.depaul.edu/jatip/vol13/iss2/5

Borelli, S., & Lenzerini, F. (Eds.). (2012). Cultural heritage, cultural rights, cultural diversity: New developments in international law. Boston: BRILL.

Brocx, M. (2008). Geoheritage: From global perspectives to local principles for conservation and planning. Western Australian Museum.

Cultural Heritage Administration. (2021, December 6). News release. https://www.cha.go.kr/newsBbz/selectNewsBbzView.do?newsItemId=155703135&sectionId=b_sec_1&pageIndex=1

Federal Bureau of Investigation. (n.d.). What we investigate. https://www.fbi.gov/investigate/violent-crime/art-crime

Folkinshteyn, B. (2007). National treasure: Implicit protections of cultural property in the United States. The Journal of Arts Management, Law, and Society, 37(2), 143–169. https://doi.org/10.3200/JAML.37.2.143-169

Gibbon, K. F. (2018). National Stolen Property Act: Primary US cultural property law. Cultural Property News. https://culturalpropertynews.org/national-stolen-property-act-primary-us-cultural-property-law/

Goldberg, A. (2006). Reaffirming McClain: The National Stolen Property Act and the abiding trade in looted cultural objects. UCLA Law Review, 53, 1031–1071. https://www.uclalawreview.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/31_53UCLALRev10312005-2006.pdf

Gutchen, M. A. (1982). The Maya crisis and the law: Current United States legal practice and the international law of the Maya antiquities trade. Arizona Journal of International and Comparative Law, 1, 283–309. https://repository.arizona.edu/bitstream/handle/10150/659612/23_1ArizJIntlCompL_283_1982.pdf?sequence=1

Helmore, E. (2023, July 1). US set to rejoin UNESCO after leaving during Trump presidency. The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/jul/01/us-set-to-rejoin-unesco-after-leaving-during-trump-presidency

Kempf, H. L., Olson, H. C., Monarrez, P. M., Bradley, L., Keane, C., & Carlson, S. J. (2023). History of Native American land and natural resource policy in the United States: Impacts on the field of paleontology. Paleobiology, 49(2), 191–203. https://doi.org/10.1017/pab.2022.41

Lalwani, N. (2020, July 19). State of the art: How cultural property became a national-security priority. Yale Law Journal Forum. https://www.yalelawjournal.org/forum

Lowthorp, L. (2010). National intangible cultural heritage (ICH) legislation & initiatives: a case study of fourteen countries. UNESCO-New Delhi Field Office. https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000368351?posInSet=17&queryId=770234a1-7580-4cc3-9e3d-ac816524b249

McAlee, J. R. (1981). From the Boston Raphael to Peruvian pots: Limitations on the importation of art into the United States. Dickinson Law Review, 85(4). https://ideas.dickinsonlaw.psu.edu/dlra/vol85/iss4/3

National Park Service. (2023, June 12). America’s geo heritage. https://www.nps.gov/subjects/geology/americas-geoheritage.htm

O’Keefe, R. (1999). The meaning of ‘cultural property’ under the 1954 Hague Convention. Netherlands International Law Review, 46(1), 26–56. https://doi.org/10.1017/S01650

Rush, L. (Ed.). (2010). Archaeology, cultural property, and the military. Boydell Press.

S. Rpt. No. 97-564. (1982). https://eca.state.gov/files/bureau/97-564.pdf

S. Rpt. No. 108-93. (2003). https://www.congress.gov/108/crpt/srpt93/CRPT-108srpt93.pdf

S. Rpt. No. 110-26. (2008). https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/CRPT-110erpt26/html/CRPT-110erpt26.htm

United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization. (n.d.). Fight Illicit Trafficking (1970 Convention). https://www.unesco.org/en/fight-illicit-trafficking

US Committee on Indian Affairs. (2021, July 28). To enhance protections of Native American tangible cultural heritage, and for other purposes. Senate Report 117-33. 117th Congress, 1st session.

US Department of the Interior. (2021). International repatriation of Native American cultural heritage. https://www.doi.gov/intl/-international-repatriation-assistance

US Department of Justice. (2016, April 5). U.S. Attorney announces return to Mongolia of looted dinosaur fossils. Press Release. https://www.justice.gov/usao-edny/pr/us-attorney-announces-return-mongolia-looted-dinosaur-fossils

US Department of State. (2024). Best practices for the Washington Conference principles on Nazi-confiscated art. https://www.state.gov/office-of-the-special-envoy-for-holocaust-issues/best-practices-for-the-washington-conference-principles-on-nazi-confiscated-art

US Government Accountability Office. (2016). Cultural property: Protection of Iraqi and Syrian antiquities (GAO-16-673). https://www.gao.gov/assets/gao-16-673.pdf

US Government Accountability Office. (2018). Native American cultural property: Additional agency actions needed to assist tribes with repatriating items from overseas auctions (GAO-18-537).

US Immigration and Customs Enforcement. (2021, January 14). Cultural property, art and antiquities investigations. https://www.ice.gov/features/cpaa

Watson, J. T., Young, A. J., Garcia-Lewis, A., Lucas, C., & Plummer, S. (2022). Respectful terminology in archaeological compliance. Advances in Archaeological Practice, 10(2), 140–148.

Publicado

2025-12-09

Cómo citar

Cho, H. (2025). Heritage Contraband: Mapping US Policy to Combat International Illicit Trafficking of Cultural Property. Cuadernos De Economía De La Cultura, (11), 66–83. https://doi.org/10.12795/CEC.2025.i11.05

Número

Sección

Artículos