Speech of Honorable Darrel Issa - H.R. 1493, The Protect and Preserve International Cultural Property Act
Floor Speech
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. Speaker, I rise to submit the thoughts of my friend, Matthew Polk, regarding the consideration of H.R. 1493, the Protect and Preserve International Cultural Property Act. Matthew Polk is deeply involved in the preservation of cultural heritage and I believe his comments are both insightful and valuable to the ongoing effort to preserve the cultural heritage of civilizations around the world.
Mr. Speaker, I first wish to thank Congressman Issa for his interest in this matter and the opportunity to provide a statement for the Congressional Record.
With regard to H.R. 1493, I applaud this bipartisan effort to protect Syrian cultural property as well as to coordinate our Government's enforcement efforts to protect international cultural property. I also applaud Mr. Chabot's and Mr. Engel's understanding that this bill is not meant to target the lawful trade in Syrian or other cultural goods and that it only authorizes import restrictions on artifacts illegally removed from Syria after the start of its civil war. Nonetheless, it must be emphasized that the burden remains on the Government to prove that the artifact in question is illicit. While protecting Syrian cultural artifacts from looting is important, it is also important that we stay true to our own values. Our tradition of due process requires that the Government meet its burden of proof before private property may be seized or forfeited. This legislation does not change the burden placed on the Government under the Convention on Cultural Property Implementation Act. Here, as under the CPIA, the Government must establish: (1) the item is of a type that appears on the designated list of Syrian artifacts that will be created; (2) the item was ``first discovered'' in Syria and is subject to Syrian export control; and (3) the item was illegally removed from Syria after the effective date of the restrictions, which in this case is March 15, 2011. The fact that an object's ``country of origin'' or manufacture may be ``Syria'' cannot constitute the sole basis for its seizure and forfeiture under either this legislation or the CPIA.
Sincerely
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Source